Google Play Serves as Make Up Letter from Google to China
September 18, 2015
The article titled Google’s Return to China Won’t Be Easy on VentureBeat discusses Google’s ambitions to revisit China with the help of Google Play, its Android mobile operating system app store. If you don’t remember, about five years ago Google refused to self-censor search results and pulled its services from China to boot. But Google can’t help looking longingly over its shoulder at the world’s largest Internet market. The article explains,
“Apple Inc complies with local laws and made $13.2 billion last quarter in Greater China…, making it its second-biggest market. Some in the industry doubt whether Google can use the Play store to help get its other services into China as domestic rivals are now well established and Google would have to comply with Chinese law. That would mean storing all data in China, and meeting information access and censorship requests, a thorny issue, particularly if the U.S. government gets involved.”
Obviously, China did not heed Google’s advice on reforming its approach to business and government oversight. Some argue that the focus on Google Play may make the movement toward China less threatening to Chinese regulators than their other services like search and Gmail. The article suggests the possibility that the lapse in Google’s presence in the market may be fatal to them there. The niche market has been working just fine, thank you very much, many mobile players believe. At any rate, Google’s hopes are a long shot unless they are willing to do it the Chinese way.
Chelsea Kerwin, September 18, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Wabion Pairs with Twigkit to Boost User Experience
September 18, 2015
We’ve learned of an interesting alliance from this announcement at OpenPR, “Strategic Partnership Between Wabion and Twigkit in the Enterprise Search Sector.” We predict that more and fancier interfaces will arise from this deal. Wabion works closely with Google, and was named “top Google for Work Partner” in the DACH (Germany, Austria, and Switzerland) region. Now the company will bring TwigKit’s user-experience prowess to their enterprise search offerings. The press release notes:
“By providing simple building blocks for traditionally complex problems, Twigkit strikes the perfect balance between out of the box experience and fine-grained control for GSA applications. Twigkit delivers customised, elegant, search-based applications that can be delivered in a fraction of the time when compared to bespoke development. The resulting applications delivers demonstrably better results and have been proven in the most demanding scenarios. The outcome is not just a better and more efficient experience for both administrators and users alike but the opportunity to allow businesses to realise the value of their information outside of the standard keyword search and list of results approach.”
Twigkit is excited for this chance to expand into the German-speaking market, while Wabion looks forward to providing a richer UI within the Google Search Appliance.
Founded in 2009, Twigkit splits its operations between Cambridge, UK, and Milpitas, California. As of this writing, they are looking to hire some developers and engineers. The Wabion Group maintains offices in Germany and Austria, and was founded in 2011. They are currently seeking one developer to fill a vacancy in Switzerland.
Cynthia Murrell, September 18, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Oracle Revenues: Implications for HP and IBM
September 17, 2015
Oracle is an interesting company because it owns a number of enterprise search and content processing technologies. For example, decades ago, the company bought the often overlooked Artificial Linguistics. Then Oracle complemented its “Text” and “Secure Enterprise Search” technology with Triple Hop. Gentle reader, I am confident you know about Triple Hop’s clustering methods. Then in a spate of content processing fury, Oracle bought RightNow (Dutch developed indexing technology), InQuira (natural language processing crafted from two early Sillycon Valley search vendors), and Endeca, the now long in the tooth, computationally intensive “Guided Navigation” outfit. And we must not forget the retrieval functions of PL/SQL. Oracle has almost as many search and retrieval systems to nurture as that high flying OpenText outfit in Canada.
With such a backpack of information access goodies, should we expect a revenue report bursting with good news? It struck me as I read “Oracle Beats Profit Estimates by a Penny a Share but Revenue Slides” that search and retrieval may not be a zoo with golden geese.
Oracle delivered earnings which made the fine Wall Street MBAs glow. However, the revenue did not win a gold star.
Set aside Oracle for the nonce.
Think about Hewlett Packard (Autonomy stuff) and IBM (Watson stuff). Both of these outfits are reporting declining revenues too. Both have bet large sums on information access.
My question is, “Will a payoff arrive?”
My other question is, “When the payoff arrives, will it make up for the loss in revenues from old line products and services?”
My hunch is that these big bets on search are current and future ponds of despair.
Now set aside these floundering blue chips.
What about the up and coming search vendors? Life is not easy for vendors of search and content processing technology. There are some bright spots, of course, but vendors with deep roots in traditional search craziness are likely to find revenues insufficient to pay for customer support, bug fixing, and implementation of new technical methods.
Google before its founders did an arabesque into Alphabet figured this out with the high interest credit card of technical debt. When will HP, IBM, and Oracle get the message?
Stephen E Arnold, September 17, 2015
Politwoops Window Now Blackened
September 17, 2015
Why is Twitter helping politician around the world cover their tracks? The Bangkok Post reports, “Website that Saves Politicians’ Deleted Tweets Suspended.” Founded by the Open State Foundation as tool for transparency, Politwoops had made an agreement with Twitter in 2012 to use its API to post tweets that politicians (or their advisors) thought better of in retrospect. While Twitter reasons that any of their users should be able to take back tweets, the Open Foundation director asserts that public statements by public officials should remain part of the public record. The article states:
“Since being formed at a so-called hackathon five years ago, the website that is a useful tool for journalists and a frequent source of embarrassment for politicians, has spread to 30 countries from Egypt to the Vatican, as well as the European Parliament. It started operating in the US in 2012 thanks to the Sunlight Foundation, which fights for transparency in politics. Diplotwoops which screens deleted messages by diplomats and embassies around the world was set up in 2014. Twitter was not immediately available for comment, but the Open Foundation said it was told the social media giant decided to suspend access to Politwoops ‘following thoughtful internal deliberation and close consideration of a number of factors that doesn’t distinguish between users.’”
Um, except that one user is not like another. The public has a vested interest in knowing where elected officials stand, and it is tough to search when the content is no longer available. I wonder just what prompted Twitter’s “thoughtful internal deliberation.”
Cynthia Murrell, September 17, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Instant Reputation: Help for Failing Enterprise Search Vendors
September 16, 2015
I know the economy is booming for marijuana vendors in Colorado. In other business sectors, the economic weights hang heavy.
One sector which has suffered for many years is what I call search and content processing. As a result, many vendors have magically changed from search into something else entirely. My textbook example is Vivisimo, the metasearch and on-the-fly clustering outfit spawned at a university in Pittsburgh. Yes, it is a high tech center. Uber bought a schools’ robotics department.
Vivisimo morphed from clustering and pretty good de-duplication to enterprise search. The search thing was okay but it required lots of fiddling with scripts and there was an annoying limit on the size of the indexes, but, hey, the company was trying. After years of effort and hitting more than $15 million in revenues, Vivisimo and its investors sold the company to IBM. Presto. Chango. Vivisimo became a Big Data outfit.
A single example selected from many search transmogrifications.
I read “I Created a Fake Business and Bought It an Amazing Online Reputation.” This service, which I assume works like a champ, is ideal for the search and content processing sector.
Gasping vendors of proprietary search systems can sign up, create a subsidiary, and charge the marketplace with an outstanding reputation. Imagine the value of Fast Search & Transfer’s indicted executive when he innovates. What about the surge of interest in Fast-Search derived systems, when those are repositioned. Think of the possibilities for these applications:
- Mid tier consulting firms can shake allegations of hanky panky and enjoy a great reputation
- Failed webmasters promoting “real” news can join the ranks of the publishers disseminating information via Facebook and Twitter
- Unemployed sales and marketing professionals can reinvent themselves as something more marketable than a former CEO with a track record of failed companies stapled to an Island cotton shirt
I learned in the write up:
I’m not the first to set up a fake business as a honey pot for fake reviews. In 2013, the New York attorney general’s office went undercover for “Operation Clean Turf.” Pretending to be a fro-yo place in Brooklyn plagued with negative reviews, the office called up “SEO shops” asking for help burnishing its online reputation. Many of them wrote fake reviews, using IP maskers and cheap freelancers abroad. At the end of that investigation, the attorney general fined 19 companies from $2,500 to $100,000 each for breaking business laws. Yes, writing fake reviews is illegal. False advertising is a misdemeanor crime. You can be fined up to $5,000 for it and spend six months in jail, or more if it’s your second offense. Even writing a real review where you don’t reveal that you were compensated to do it violates guidelines set forth by the Federal Trade Commission, which is one of the reasons why it wasn’t kosher for Kim Kardashian to pose on Instagram with her favorite morning sickness pills. But lots of people are still doing it. Technology research firm Gartner thinks that 10-15% of all reviews online are fake.
Does this mean that mid tier consulting firms, unemployed middle school teachers, and struggling search vendors will not use the service?
Good question probably best answered by the outfits who have pumped tens of millions of dollars into search and content processing companies.
Stephen E Arnold, September 16, 2015
Where’s the Finish Line Enterprise Search?
September 16, 2015
What never ceases to amaze me is that people are always perplexed when goals for technology change. It always comes with a big hullabaloo and rather than complaining about the changes, time would be better spent learning ways to adapt and learn from the changes. Enterprise search is one of those technology topics that sees slow growth, but when changes occur they are huge. Digital Workplace Group tracks the newest changes in enterprise search, explains why they happened, and how to adapt: “7 Ways The Goal Posts On Enterprise Search Have Moved.”
After spending an inordinate amount of explaining how the author arrived at the seven ways enterprise search has changed, we are finally treated to the bulk of the article. Among the seven reasons are obvious insights that have been discussed in prior articles on Beyond Search, but there are new ideas to ruminate about. Among the obvious are that users want direct answers, they expect search to do more than find information, and understanding a user’s intent. While the obvious insights are already implemented in search engines, enterprise search lags behind.
Enterprise search should work on a more personalized level due it being part of a closed network and how people rely on it to fulfill an immediate need. A social filter could be applied to display a user’s personal data in search results and also users rely on the search filter as a quick shortcut feature. Enterprise search is way behind in taking advantage of search analytics and how users consume and manipulate data.
“To summarize everything above: Search isn’t about search; it’s about finding, connecting, answers, behaviors and productivity. Some of the above changes are already here within enterprises. Some are still just being tested in the consumer space. But all of them point to a new phase in the life of the Internet, intranets, computer technology and the experience of modern, digital work.”
As always there is a lot of room for enterprise search improvement, but these changes need to made for an updated and better work experience.
Whitney Grace, September 16, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Mondeca Has a Sandbox
September 15, 2015
French semantic tech firm Mondeca has their own research arm, Mondeca Labs. Their website seems to be going for a playful, curiosity-fueled vibe. The intro states:
“Mondeca Labs is our sandbox: we try things out to illustrate the potential of Semantic Web technologies and get feedback from the Semantic Web community. Our credibility in the Semantic Web space is built on our contribution to international standards. Here we are always looking for new challenges.”
The page links to details on several interesting projects. One entry we noticed right away is for an inference engine; they say it is “coming soon,” but a mouse click reveals that no info is available past that hopeful declaration. The site does supply specifics about other projects; some notable examples include linked open vocabularies, a SKOS reader, and a temporal search engine. See their home page, above, for more.
Established in 1999, Mondeca has delivered pragmatic semantic solutions to clients in Europe and North America for over 15 years. The firm is based in Paris, France.
Cynthia Murrell, September 15, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Search and Find Love but Maybe Not
September 13, 2015
My trusty alert service delivered me this search gem: “13 Apps 17 Dates 30 Days: I Tried 13 Dating Apps in 30 Days in Search of Love.” Shadows of Ashley Madison could not obscure this clickable topic.
Here’s what I learned:
- There are sites with interesting names with which I was not familiar. Here are two examples Jack’D and Scruff.
- Dating apps can be used to deliver ads. Love for someone I assume.
- Finding love takes “time and energy.” Yep, just like my notions for information access.
- Some love search apps ask users to involve their Twitter followers. Now that’s a great idea for some folks.
Main point of the write up: Love apps don’t work. Wow, revelation.
Stephen E Arnold, September 13, 2015
Social Consensus: Control Becomes a Big Thing
September 13, 2015
I read “The Cable Industry Faces the Perfect Storm: Apps, App Stores, and Apple.” I think the idea is a valid one. I am not sure about the Apple thing.
Let’s go to the Web page. (Shades of Warner Wolfe.)
The write up states:
the average US consumer is spending 198 minutes per day inside apps compared to 168 minutes on TV. Please note that the 198 minutes per day spent inside apps on smart phones and tablets don’t include time spent in the mobile browser. In fact, if we add that time, the total time spent on mobile devices by the average US consumer is now 220 minutes (or 3 hours and 40 minutes) per day…
In the good old days, people were supposed to be watching the fire burn in their caves. Then folks listened to Jack Benny on Sunday night. When I was a wee lad, we had a black and white television which sort of worked. My progeny had color TV to watch. Today lots of people look at tiny screens and checking Facebook or looking for pizza via Google or Alphabet or whatever the company is.
Bad news for cable companies it seems.
Forget the cable folks. My view is that the bad news is what I call the consensus problem. Shared experiences are blockbusters in the James Twitchell sense of the word in Adcult USA.
Cohesiveness comes from the Super Bowl and similar constructs. The implications of this tiny screen shift are significant. Losers will be the organizations constructed to serve the mass markets of mass media.
Apple, bless its innovative heart, makes gizmos. The powerhouses are the outfits which deliver micro-content and micro-experiences to the OreIda’s walking around or sitting in coffee shops with their mobile devices.
Search and retrieval? A loser. Sustained concentration? A loser. Consensus? Interesting about that.
Stephen E Arnold, September 13, 2015
Coveo: A Real Life Search Implementation Success
September 11, 2015
If we detect some serious Coveo cheerleading in this recent article found on RT Insights, that might be because the story originated at that company. Still, “How Real-Time Enterprise Search Helps Seal Financial Deals” does illustrate the advantages of consolidating data resources into a more easily-used system.
The write-up describes challenges faced by London investment firm 3i Group. The global company had been collecting an abundance of data about its clients’ deals, but was spending many worker hours retrieving that information from scattered repositories. Coveo Enterprise Search to the rescue! The platform implementation included a user-friendly UI, actionable analytics, and security measures. The article continues:
“As a result of the implementation, 3i Group reports 90 percent faster access to deal-related intelligence as well as a 20 percent reduction in staff and resources required to respond to compliance requests. 3i Group’s staff members use the platform to search across 3.66 million file share documents, 6.39 million Exchange emails, 897,000 SharePoint documents, and 107 million Enterprise Vault records. For the first time, 3i Group staff members are able to perform a single search across all of the company’s knowledge repositories by using either a browser-based interface or an integrated search interface within SharePoint. 3i Group’s compliance team was provided with a dashboard that enabled them to search and correlate content from across 3i Group’s entire data set, and quickly evaluate permissions and user access rights for every 3i Group record or knowledge asset.”
Founded in 2005, Coveo maintains offices in California and the Netherlands, with its R&D headquarters in Quebec. (The company is also hiring as of this writing.)There is no doubt that being able to reach and analyze all data from one dashboard can be a huge time-saver, especially for a large organization. Just remember that Coveo is but one of several strong options; some are even open source.
Cynthia Murrell, September 11, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
