Facebook Face Play No Big Surprise
June 14, 2011
You might be living under a rock if you haven’t heard about Facebook’s newest addition to its social network–facial recognition software. That’s right – the beloved social network is building a database of their user’s faces and telling us it’s all to make our lives easier. As discussed in “Facebook Quietly Switches on Facial Recognition Tech by Default” the controversial feature allows users “to automatically provide tags for the photos uploaded” by recognizing facial features of your friends from previously uploaded photos. Yet again, Facebook finds themselves under fire their laissez-faire attitude towards privacy.
This latest Facebook technology is being vilified. It has been called “creepy,” “disheartening,” and even “terrifying.” These are words that would usually be reserved for the likes of Charles Manson or Darth Vader, not an online social network. The biggest backlash seems to come from the fact that the didn’t “alert its international stalkerbase that its facial recognition software had been switched on by default within the social network.” This opt-out, instead of opt-in, attitude is what is upsetting the masses. Graham Cluely, a UK-based security expert says that “[y]et again, it feels like Facebook is eroding the online privacy of its users by stealth.”
To be fair, Facebook released a notice on The Facebook Blog in December 2010that the company was unleashing its “tag suggestions” to United States users and when you hear them describe the technology it seems to be anything, but Manson-esque. In fact, it invokes thoughts of Happy Days. They say that since people upload 100 million tagged photos everyday, that they simply are helping “you and your friends relive everything from that life-altering skydiving trip to a birthday dinner where the laughter never stopped.” They go as far as to say that photo tags are an “essential tool for sharing important moments” and facial recognition just makes that easier.
Google has also been working on facial recognition technology in the form of a smartphone app known as Google Googles and celebrity recognition. However, now Google is claiming to have halted the project because, as Google Chairman Eric Schmidt said “[p]eople could use this stuff in a very, very bad way as well as in a good way.” See “Facebooks’s Again in Spotlight on Privacy”.
So who’s right? Facebook by moving forward or Google by holding up its facial recognition technology?
It seems to me that Google is just delaying the inevitable. Let’s face it. As a Facebook user my right to my privacy may be compromised the second I sign up in exchange for what Facebook offers.
Technology, like the facial recognition software, is changing the social media landscape, and I suppose I should not be surprised when the company implements its newest creation even when it puts my privacy at risk.
Is it creepy?
Probably and users should be given an opportunity to opt-in, not out. Is it deplorable. No. It’s our option to join and Facebook is taking full advantage of it.
Jennifer Wensink, June 14, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Protected: Darwin Information Typing Architecture (DITA) and SharePoint
June 13, 2011
More on Google and Digital Music
June 8, 2011
I don’t get rich media. I find it fascinating that Google is working hard to develop street cred in rich media, which includes audio, video, and immersive representations like its newest map features.
“Google Was Ready To Pay $100 Million To Record Labels” contained an interesting statement:
Google is one of the most powerful and successful companies currently in existence. They have delved into nearly every facet of the internet and have been successful. Yet they have never attempted to enter the digital music world, or have they?
According to sources Google was prepared to pay $100 million to record labels to start its music service last December. This large number shows that any startup music web sites could not afford the initial fee it would take to get into the digital music market. According to Billboard, “talks broke down because some labels demanded that Google do more to eliminate pirated music sites from its search results. Google couldn’t agree to compromise its crown jewel, search, so instead it launched with an imperfect service.”
For now Google may have to settle with the current stranglehold they have on the world and allow Apple to continue to be top dog in digital music market. It is after all the search engine that makes Google such a successful company and any tinkering with that formula could spell trouble for Google.
We revisited this article after we saw Apple’s stock take a hit when Apple announced its cloud music service. Maybe lots of people don’t get the online music angle. Google is not alone.
Here’s a thought. Google generates most of its revenue from search. What if there is no “next big thing” for Google? What if the Apple cloud play flops?
Stephen E Arnold, June 8, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
Apple versus Google: Whose $100 Million Worked Harder?
June 3, 2011
I just finished reading “Google’s CEO Steps into Spotlight.” There was one item that jumped off the page in my opinion; to wit:
For the media, “it’s much more interesting — what is the latest crazy thing that Google did,” Page said. “It tends to be like three people in the company, keep that in mind. We are not betting the farm on a lot of those things. That’s not what we are doing.” Still, Page said, now-crucial products like Android and Chrome started off as technological long-shots, and there were few hostile questions from the roughly 250 shareholders who attended the annual meeting. “We don’t want to choke innovation. We want to make sure we have a lot of things going on at the company that are maybe speculative,” Page said, quickly adding, “we spend the vast majority of our resources on our core businesses, which are search and advertising. … That’s our core focus.”
The number of articles about the shareholders’ meeting and the comments of Google founder and CEO cover most of the angles. There is little that I can add other than point out the use of the word “crazy” in the phrase “the latest crazy thing that Google did.” Oh, I want to mention that my reading skills are not so hot. I thought I detected an interesting logic stream in the comment about “technoloigcal long shots”, “choke innovation”, and “our core businesses, which are search and advertising.” I interpreted these phrases as suggessting that Google does need crazy things.
The more pragmatic “thing” today is the news that Apple’s $100 million was different from Google’s alleged $100 million to music companies. Here was Google talking about the core of search and advertising, and at roughly the same time, Apple seemed to cement its grip on music in the cloud. Here’s a comment from “Major Labels, Music Publishers Lining up behind Apple’s iCloud” from the Los Angeles Times with the part I noted in bold face:
Apple, whose iTunes music store is the dominant purveyor of music downloads with between 75% and 85% of the market, has been carefully monitoring moves by rival Amazon.com as well as newcomers to the digital music space, including Google and, in Europe, Spotify.
Google has not been able to marginalize Apple. The notion of having apps in the cloud is a good one. What Apple has achieved is getting money directly from people via its walled garden approach. I don’t think of Apple doing “crazy” stuff. I don’t think of Apple taking long shots in today’s unsettled financial climate. I don’t think of Apple mired in legal hassles worldwide. I don’t think of Apple accusing countries of trying to access user data. In fact, I see Google as a company working hard to explain that online advertising and search are the foundation of Google.
I do not disagree. Google is an extension of AltaVista.com and other precursor search systems. Google is an evolution of Yahoo’s Overture (GoTo.com) ad business. The challenge for Google is to find a way to cope with the world beyond AltaVista.com search and beyond the online ad models from the traditional world of online.
Android is a start. It is arguably more successful than Apple’s mobile platform. Chrome is a start. It is arguably more successful than other cloud netbook operating systems if there are any.
Shareholders want Apple style revenues and profits. Shareholdeers want excitement too. But shareholders want performance. Me too plays, non magnetic $100 million deals, and long shots that become winners do not seem to be operating at the level of efficiency that an Indianapolis 500’s race car engine requires. Google is in the race. Can it make up lost time and, if it does, can it retain the lead in hot new markets where advertising may be only part of the revenue model and search is vastly different from the AltaVista.com method from the mid 1990s.
Apple’s $100 million may have worked harder. Google’s may not have worked yet. What is interesting is that Google’s future may be increasingly shaped by Amazon, Apple, and Facebook, not “crazy” stuff.
Stephen E Arnold, June 3, 2011
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, the resource for enterprise search information and current news about data fusion
America, We Have a Problem
May 22, 2011
Push aside the woes of publishers. After reading “Video Viewing on Netflix Accounts for Up to 30 Percent of Online Traffic,” I fear for America. I like to read. Recently I have shifted from non fiction to lighter fare, but I fall asleep in movie theaters and I just cannot pay attention to TV shows. Sports and a handful of other shows work like background noise for me. When the roar sounds, I look up and drink in the goal or the “moment”. Then, it is back to the book, iPad, or notebook computer. I am not sure watching videos delivers the type of hands on, kinaesthetic learning that my education offered. Couch potatoes can be bright, maybe Einstein class thinkers. I find this type of statement downright frightening:
People watching videos on Netflix take up more bandwidth on the Internet than users of any other Web site or service in North America, according to a report Tuesday by broadband analytics firm Sandvine. At peak Internet hours, as much as 30 percent of online traffic is generated by Netflix subscribers who are watching movies or TV shows over their laptops, game consoles and smartphones. The report highlights a rapid move by consumers toward the Web for their entertainment and news. Netflix accounted for 20 percent of Internet traffic just six months ago, according to Sandvine.
The new thinkers, yikes.
Stephen E Arnold, May 22, 2011
Freebie
Google I/O: Focus or Scatter?
May 16, 2011
Are the developments reported in EWeek’s piece, “Google Cloud Music, Movies Open Google I/O,” indicative of Google’s recent focus? It seems that the two most tout-able Google projects involve a music storage service and a movie rental site. Is it just me, or does Google seem to have little search news at its input/output conference?
With the turmoil over PageRank changes, Google is pushing into markets with a “me too” vengeance. I suppose we can’t blame Google for being a little search-shy right now. However, I don’t believe they will prosper by veering far from their core strength.
Besides, the move into music isn’t without its own complications. The article asserted:
“Unfortunately, like Amazon, Google has not secured music labels’ permission for streaming the songs…Jamie Rosenberg, Google’s director of digital content, argued that its approach is completely legal, that it is simply providing a music storage service for users. However, he allowed that labels were not receptive to Google’s service under its current iteration.
We’ll see which of Google’s many, many initiatives pan out as time goes on. We want to see more emphasis on search and details about the Blogger crash. If Google wants me to use a Chromebook, I want the Google cloud to be there, not offline with apps and content lost in the fog. The Google scatter may be reflections of the cloud coming to earth and reflecting at odd angles.
Cynthia Murrell May 16, 2011
Freebie
ZyLAB Audio Search
May 11, 2011
It’s like semantic search for audio files: Allvoipnews announces “ZyLAB Launches Audil Search Bundle.” The eDiscovery company’s product allows you to search your enterprise’s audio using speech analytics:
Company officials said that the desktop software product transforms audio recordings into a phonetic representation of the way in which words are pronounced. The investigators are able to search for dictionary terms, however also proper names, company names, or brands without the need to ‘re-ingest’ the data.
Kudos to ZyLAB. With this project, the company is pushing ahead of Microsoft Fast and Google. That’s no small feat. However, Exalead has offered audio and video search for several years.
Cynthia Murrell May 11, 2011
Find Images with GazoPa
May 11, 2011
I recently was introduced to GazoPa, an interesting new Web site and venture project from Hitachi, the inspire the next company. (I think I know what that means.) GazoPa is self-described as:
a next generation similar image search engine that uses image features such as a color and a shape that are extracted from an image.
The photo bank is populated by the continuously crawling GazoPabot and at its completion will provide categories like sports, funny, and Flickr.
The site is uncluttered, so it wasn’t difficult to start poking around the features. It allows you to upload an image, enter an image URL or a keyword to find a similar image. Pretty simple. It even provides the tools to draw an image, paintbrush style, and use that as the baseline for a picture hunt.
My preliminary queries reaped entertaining results, which seems to be part of the sites M.O. considering the inclusion of its playful “shuffle” feature. I tested a sample image provided, scribbled my own and pitched up a keyword. Some of the returned images were pretty close, others I have no idea how they were tossed into the mix. Upon further investigation, the site’s FAQ details that their algorithm is improving with time and they are in the beta phase. So the quirkiness is to be expected, at least for a while.
Will this change the internet as we know it? Doubtfully, but it is cool way to leverage information in another format, and by someone other than Google and Microsoft.
Sarah Rogers, May 11, 2011
Freebie
Yahoo Acting Fast. Another Broadcast.com?
May 11, 2011
Yahoo is at it again. Reminiscent of its 1999 $5-billion purchase of Broadcast.com, the Web site is acquiring IntoNow for reportedly $13 million. This deal is different. Yahoo is spending less. On the other hand, IntoNow is a newly hatched operation.
According to Forbes’ “Yahoo Acquires IntoNow For TV Check-ins,” IntoNow’s mobile software “makes it easier for people to let their friends know what TV shows they’re watching.” BusinessWeek’s “Yahoo acquisition adds way to share TV show info,” points out that the IntoNow technology also “lets viewers identify their favorite TV commercials, a feature that might open up ways for Yahoo to sell more ads in its online videos.”
While Yahoo is looking to combine rich media with the power of social media, the company doesn’t have a great track record with video acquisitions. Financial analyst Michael Onghai warns that while “Yahoo had a great instinct for the value of video, the problem was timing in 1999 and the problem in 2011 may be timing. Yahoo has to demonstrate that it can buy a property and generate significant revenue.” Mr. Onghai is active in a promising operation, www.thinkweb3.com.
Yahoo seems to be moving in interesting ways. Search does not seem to be a priority. Hopefully these will pay off for Yahoo’s stakeholders.
Rita Safranek, May 11, 2011
Freebie
Protected: SharePoint and Silverlight Collaborate on Rich Media
May 11, 2011
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
