Google Press, O Reilly, and a Possible Info Discontinuity
January 4, 2010
Google’s book on HTML5 is moving along. Soon it will be available for sale. At that moment, a seismic shock is triggered in the already Jello like world of traditional publishing. Oh, if you don’t know about the Google Press imprint, you can catch up on your reading by looking at:
- HTML5’s rel=”noreferrer”
- A version of the “book’s title page”
- Mr. Pilgrim’s own statement
For a more robust discussion of the tools Google will use as it solves the copyright problem for new, significant content, check out Google: The Digital Gutenberg, September 2009. Better yet, write me at seaky2000 at yahoo dot com and inquire about a 90 minute briefing on Google’s publishing technology and the disruptions these technologies are likely to let loose in 2010.
First, let me provide some context.
In Google: The Digital Gutenberg I pointed out that Google’s infrastructure works like a digital River Rouge. Put stuff in at one end and things come out the other. The steady progress of Google toward a clean, tidy solution to copyright hassles is for Google to become a publisher. What goes in at one end are content objects and what comes out the other can be just about anything Google can program its manufacturing system to produce.
Now I know that the publishers want Google to [a] quit being Google, which is tough since the Google is little more than a manifestation of technology anybody could have glued together 11 years ago, [b] subsidize publishers so the arbiters of what’s smart and what’s stupid can continue as museum curators of information, and [c] give publishers some of the profits from advertising so publishers can shop for white shoes and vintage motor yachts.
Google uses algorithms like a fishmonger to convert the beastie into tasty, easily sold fillets. Image source: http://www.fishingkites.co.nz/cleaning-fish/filleting_fish/fillet_2.jpg
The solution is simpler. When Google signs up an author, Google offers terms. The author takes the terms or leaves the terms. Now the Google does not go quickly into that good night. The Google takes baby steps. Google has a fondness for Tim O’Reilly, and it supports number of O’Reilly ventures, including the somewhat interesting Government 2.0 conference.
Your Inner Sherlock: People Search Engines
December 31, 2009
Short honk: This write up — “5 Powerful Ways To Google People From Alternative Search Engines” – provides a useful run down of services that focus on “people search”. The idea is a bit like white pages on steroids. The systems provide hits to addresses and phone numbers and some include information from social networking sites. Worth a look. Indulge your amateur detective instincts or just find the phone number of a painter.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 31, 2010
I must disclose that I was not paid to write this. I did weasel some dough from the engaging owner of Gaviri’s universal search system. The ad goes up the first week of January 2010. I will disclose this to the Labor Department (DOL).
IBM Replays Its 1982 Audiotape, We Are Right
December 29, 2009
Lesie P. Norton’s “Smart Play” contains what I call a Microsoft moment. (Note: this link may go dead as part of Rupert Murdoch’s vision for the Web. Subscribe as I do.) I refer to IBM’s licensing of Bill Gates’s outstanding disc operating system. This decision set off a chain of events that involved a possible suicide, the reshaping of the computing industry, and the shift at IBM from a technology company to a technology consulting company. (Just my opinion, IBM PR professional. Please, don’t call me for a briefing.) Now “Smart Play” seems to have documented another interesting point in IBM’s competitive assessment heartbeat. Here’s the passage that caught my attention:
Google paranoia: “Is Google [GOOG] going to become the computing platform for the enterprise? Is a bank going to run itself on Google? Is an airline going to run itself on Google? Is IBM going to run its supply chain on Google? Is Bharti Wireless going to run themselves on Google? Is the banking system of China that we’ve built going to be on Google? Is the Russian Central Bank [network] that we’re building going to be on Google? No. The exchanges we’re building? No.”
No. Got it. Should I outline the conditions under which any of these outfits will shift from IBM to another vendor? No, I don’t need another IBM PR call. I will add this quote to the folder that contains the letter I received that suggests IBM knows exactly what Google is doing. Like pressed flowers in a year book for me. There is a post from SearchEngineLand.com, but that misspells IBM’s top dog’s name. Well, spelling is for dweebs , right? Details, details.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 29, 2009
I was not paid to write this. I must report this fact to the Securities & Exchange Commission when everyone returns to work on Monday, well, maybe Tuesday. If there’s snow, maybe next year?
AOL 2010 Unveiled
December 26, 2009
Short honk: I must admit I was surprised to learn how AOL will position itself in 2010. An organization that converted Relegence.com into Love.com has deeper thoughts than I. Navigate to Business Insider and read “AOL Is Just as Much a Journalistic Organization as The New York Times.” If you are a new media enthusiast, you can listen to a podcast in which the secret plans for AOL are disclosed. Here’s the stunner:
AOL is just as much a journalistic organization as The New York Times, as Bloomberg, as NBC News, as all kinds of organizations new and old.
Okay. The ambiguity in this statement is as delicious as it rhetorical halo.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 26, 2009
Oyez, oyez, I was not paid to point out this secret. Nevertheless I will do my duty because the Central Intelligence Agency needs to know this fact about a company so, so close to the “special” landing area at Dulles Airport. You never know, do you?
Need an IBM Mainframe Specialist
December 25, 2009
A happy quack to the reader who pointed out a tweet that in turn pointed to the IBM Web site’s list of people on the “Master the Mainframe Content 2009” page. If you are looking for someone in a university who might be available to assist you with your mainframe challenges, check out the list. There are no hot links to the people, but the individual and his / her institution is provided. With that information, I was able to locate the three folks I selected at random. I pass this along because there is a perception that no youngsters know anything about the IBM mainframe. IBM is doing what it can to keep electricity flowing to the iron lungs. If you have STAIRS III, you may want to download and save this list for reference in 2010.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 25, 2009
I was not paid to write about IBM and its potential mainframe enthusiasts. I suppose I should report this fact to the Science Office (Energy Department). I think that group might have some mainframe affection.
Algorithms Get Their Own Patent SAT
December 25, 2009
“New Patent Test for Machines using Mathematical Algorithms” is worth a read if you are interested in patent applications. I am no attorney, but when I take a gander at patent applications created by and for outfits like Google, there are quite a few numerical recipes in these publications. Erik Sherman’s write up explains:
there’s a newly published decision from the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences that establishes a new test to determine whether a machine or manufactured article that depends on a mathematical algorithm is patentable. The ruling is a big deal because it’s one of the few precedential decisions that the BPAI issues in a given year, and it will have a direct impact on patents involving computers and software.
There is some legal jargon in the write up, but for me the bottom-line is that an already interesting process is probably to become more interesting in 2010.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 25, 2009
This is an easy one. The write up was done without anyone giving me so much as a piece of finsk broed. I will report this sad circumstance to the Marketing and Regulatory Programs (Agriculture Department), an outfit with jurisdiction over Web log posts with a nourishing item of information within their letters and words.
Search Lemma Two
December 23, 2009
Another lemma for the search and content processing crowd:
Search generally delivers data. Search may deliver information. Search never delivers knowledge.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 22, 2009
A freebie. Who’s on first today? Oh, yes, I must report this to Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Medical online information is an excellent way to test this lemma.
Preliminary List of Beyond Search Evaluated Social Search Systems
December 23, 2009
The goslings and I had some disagreements about what to include and what to exclude. If you read my column in Incisive Media’s Information World Review, I have mentioned many of these systems. In London earlier this month a person asked me to run a table of the social search systems. I anticipate that a large number of azure chip consultants, poobahs, satraps, and SEO mavens will have a field day recycling these links. The addled goose is too old and too disinterested to honk much about short cuts.
As with our list of European enterprise search vendors, we will add to this list over time. I will not include my ratings for each system in this list. I have not decided about using my goose ratings as part of the Overflight service or one of the listings on my archive Web site. If you don’t agree with a site’s inclusion or if you have a site to suggest, use the comments section of the Web log. There will be some weird breaks and spacing issues. WordPress often baffles me with its handling of table code. If the breaks annoy you, the addled goose says, “Create your own list.” Honk.
Search Lemma One
December 22, 2009
Editor’s note: A new, brief series makes a statement about search and content processing. The idea is to make clear that what people think they know about search may be wide of the mark. I have started gathering these, and I am not sure if I will be able to go beyond the five I have in hand.
Search makes evident that we cannot find
what we know we know is there.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 22, 2009
Freebie. Happy New Year or whatever you celebrate. Oh, I have to report that I was not paid for this lemma. Today, the oversight authority is National Endowment for the Humanities, an entity involved in lemmas and dilemmas.
Google Thinks Like a Small Company
December 22, 2009
I like irony. Read “Interview with Google’s Alan Eustace” in Forbes. I don’t suppose you know Dr. Eustace. He is like most Google wizards, low profile.
First, he rates a picture on Google’s “Execs.html” page. He has participated in a Google fireside chat with Dave Girouard. He has a Wikipedia reference. Here’s what Google officially says about Dr.Eustace:
Alan Eustace is one of Google’s senior vice presidents of engineering. He joined Google in the summer of 2002. Prior to Google, Alan spent 15 years at Digital/Compaq/HP’s Western Research Laboratory where he worked on a variety of chip design and architecture projects, including the MicroTitan Floating Point unit, BIPS – the fastest microprocessor of its era. Alan also worked with Amitabh Srivastava on ATOM, a binary code instrumentation system that forms the basis for a wide variety of program analysis and computer architecture analysis tools. These tools had a profound influence on the design of the EV5, EV6 and EV7 chip designs. Alan was promoted to director of the Western Research Laboratory in 1999. WRL had active projects in pocket computing, chip multi-processors, power and energy management, internet performance, and frequency and voltage scaling. In addition to directing Google’s engineering efforts, Alan is actively involved in a number of Google’s community-related activities such as The Second Harvest Food Bank and the Anita Borg Scholarship Fund. Alan is an author of 9 publications and holds 10 patents. He earned a Ph.D. in computer science from the University of Central Florida.
I like the gentle reference to the Western Research Lab, one of those context free Google references that I find amusing. There is also a genetic link to Digital Equipment, a source of a number of Google wizards. He has some interesting connections; for example, Cluuz.com reports this:
The key point for me was this statement from the Google interview:
Google is not interested in solving the small problems of the world. Its vast engineering talent (roughly half of the company) is eager to work on large problems that have a big impact on its users, says Alan Eustace, the senior VP of engineering and research for Google, who has been with the company for seven years.
The question for me is, “What’s “small problems” mean? Flip it around, what’s a “big problem”? The comment “big impact” does not help too much.
My take on this interview is that the Google is going to disrupt more than online, advertising, telephony, and publishing in 2010.
You can dig through the interview to find your own nuggets. Here’s one I found:
We’re well positioned on most of the things that we’re doing. But in hindsight we were a little slow in the mobile space because the ecosystem was very difficult to penetrate.
Ah, the irony of the “were”. So, now that the telcos have been converted into spaniels, what’s next? Clues abound in Google Version 2.0: The Calculating Predator.
Stephen E. Arnold, December 22, 2009
A shameless pitch for my 2007 Google study. I don’t think I have to report that I pay myself to write swill about my impenetrable monographs based on patent documents.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
