Governments Tip Toe As OpenAI Sprints: A Story of the Turtles and the Rabbits

November 27, 2023

green-dino_thumb_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb dinobaby. No smart software required.

Reuters has reported that a pride of lion-hearted countries have crafted “joint guidelines” for systems with artificial intelligence. I am not exactly sure what “artificial intelligence” means, but I have confidence that a group of countries, officials, advisor, and consultants do.

The main point of the news story “US, Britain, Other Countries Ink Agreement to Make AI Secure by Design” is that someone in these countries knows what “secure by design” means. You may not have noticed that cyber breaches seem to be chugging right along. Maine managed to lose control of most of its residents’ personally identifiable information. I won’t mention issues associated with Progress Software, Microsoft systems, and LY Corp and its messaging app with a mere 400,000 users.


The turtle started but the rabbit reacted. Now which AI enthusiast will win the race down the corridor between supercomputers powering smart software? Thanks, MSFT Copilot. It took several tries, but you delivered a good enough image.

The Reuters’ story notes with the sincerity of an outfit focused on trust:

The agreement is the latest in a series of initiatives – few of which carry teeth – by governments around the world to shape the development of AI, whose weight is increasingly being felt in industry and society at large.

Yep, “teeth.”

At the same time, Sam AI-Man was moving forward with such mouth-watering initiatives as the AI app store and discussions to create AI-centric hardware. “I Guess We’ll Just Have to Trust This Guy, Huh?” asserts:

But it is clear who won (Altman) and which ideological vision (regular capitalism, instead of some earthy, restrained ideal of ethical capitalism) will carry the day. If Altman’s camp is right, then the makers of ChatGPT will innovate more and more until they’ve brought to light A.I. innovations we haven’t thought of yet.

As the signatories to the agreement without “teeth” and Sam AI-Man were doing their respective “thing,” I noted the AP story titled “Pentagon’s AI Initiatives Accelerate Hard Decisions on Lethal Autonomous Weapons.” That write up reported:

… the Pentagon is intent on fielding multiple thousands of relatively inexpensive, expendable AI-enabled autonomous vehicles by 2026 to keep pace with China.

To deal with the AI challenge, the AP story includes this paragraph:

The Pentagon’s portfolio boasts more than 800 AI-related unclassified projects, much still in testing. Typically, machine-learning and neural networks are helping humans gain insights and create efficiencies.

Will the signatories to the “secure by design” agreement act like tortoises or like zippy hares? I know which beastie I would bet on. Will military entities back the slow or the fast AI faction? I know upon which I would wager fifty cents.

Stephen E Arnold, November 27, 2023

The Brin-A-Loon: A Lofty Idea Is Ready to Take Flight

November 3, 2023

green-dino_thumb_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

I read “Sergey Brin’s 400-Foot Airship Reportedly Cleared for Takeoff.” I am not sure how many people know about Mr. Brin’s fascination with a balloon larger than Vladimir Putin’s yacht. The article reports:

While the concept of rigid airships and the basic airframe design are a throwback to pre-Hindenburg times of the early 1900s, Pathfinder 1 uses a frame made from 96 welded titanium hubs, joined by some 289 reinforced carbon fiber tubes. These materials advances keep it light enough to fly using helium, rather than hydrogen as a lift gas.

10 28 brinaloon

A high technology balloon flies near the Stanford campus, heading toward the Paul Allen Building. Will the aspiring network wizards notice the balloon? Probably not. Thanks, MidJourney. A bit like the movie posters I saw as a kid, but close enough for horseshoes and the Brin-A-Loon.

High tech. Plus helium (an increasingly scarce resource for the Brin-A-Loon and party balloons at Dollar General) does not explode. Remember that newsreel footage from New Jersey. Hydrogen, not helium.

The article continues:

According to IEEE Spectrum, the company has now been awarded the special airworthiness certificate required to fly this beast outdoors – at less than 1,500 ft (460 m) of altitude, and within the boundaries of Moffett Field and the neighboring Palo Alto Airport’s airspace.

Will there be UFO reports on TikTok and YouTube?

What’s the purpose of the Brin-A-Loon? The write up opines:

LTA says its chief focus is humanitarian aid; airships can get bulk cargo in and people out of disaster areas when roads and airstrips are destroyed and there’s no way for other large aircraft to get in and out. Secondary opportunities include slow point-to-point cargo operations, although the airships will be grounded if the weather doesn’t co-operate.

I remember the Loon balloons. The idea was to use Loon balloons to deliver Internet access in places like Sri Lanka, Puerto Rico, and Africa. Great idea. The hitch in the float along was that the weather was a bit of an issue. Oh, the software — like much of the Googley code floating around — was a bit problematic.

The loon balloons are gone. But the Brin-A-Loon is ready to take to the air. The craft may find a home in Ohio. Good for Ohio. And the Brinaloon will be filled with helium like birthday party balloons. Safer than hydrogen. Will the next innovation be the Brin-Train, a novel implementation of the 18th century Leland Stanford railroad engines?

Stephen E Arnold, November 3, 2023

Making Chips: What Happens When Sanctions Spark Work Arounds

October 25, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[2]Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

Maybe the Japanese outfit Canon is providing an example of the knock on effects of sanctions. On the other hand, maybe this is just PR. My hunch is more information will become available in the months ahead. “Nanoimprint Lithography Semiconductor Manufacturing System That Covers Diverse Applications with Simple Patterning Mechanism” discloses:

On October 13, 2023, Canon announced today the launch of the FPA-1200NZ2C nanoimprint semiconductor manufacturing equipment, which executes circuit pattern transfer, the most important semiconductor manufacturing process.

10 15 otter try 2

“This might be important,” says a technologically oriented animal in rural Kentucky. Thanks, MidJourney, continue to descend gradiently.

The idea is small and printing traces of a substance. The application is part of the expensive and delicate process of whipping out modern chips.

The write up continues:

By bringing to market semiconductor manufacturing equipment with nanoimprint lithography (NIL) technology, in addition to existing photolithography systems, Canon is expanding its lineup of semiconductor manufacturing equipment to meet the needs of a wide range of users by covering from the most advanced semiconductor devices to the existing devices.

Several observations are warranted:

  1. Oh, oh. A new process may be applicable to modern chip manufacturing.
  2. The system and method may be of value to countries dealing with US sanctions.
  3. Clever folks find ways to do things that regulatory language cannot anticipate.

Is this development important even if the Canon announcement is a bit fluffy? Yep, because the information about the system and method provide important road signs on the information superhighway. Canon does cameras, owns some intelware technology, and now allegedly provides an alternative to the traditional way to crank out advanced semiconductors.

Stephen E Arnold, October 25, 2023

HP Innovation: Yes, Emulate Apple and Talk about AI

October 24, 2023

green-dino_thumbThis essay is the work of a dumb humanoid. No smart software required.

Amazing, according to the Freedictionary means “ To affect with great wonder; astonish.” I relate to the archaic meaning of the word; to wit: “To bewilder; perplex.” I was bewildered when I read about HP’s “magic.” But I am a dinobaby. What do I know? Not much but …

I read “The Magic Presented at HP Imagine 2023.” Yep, magic. The write up profiles HP innovations. These were presented in “stellar fashion.” The speaker was HP’s PR officer. According to the write up:

It stands as one of the best-executed presentations I’ve ever attended.

Not to me. Such understatement. Such a subtle handling of brilliant innovations at HP.

Let’s check out these remarkable examples cited in the article by a person who is clearly objective, level headed, and digging into technology because it is just the right thing to do. Here we go: Innovation includes AI and leads to greater efficiency. HP is the place to go for cost reduction.

Innovation 1: HP is emulating Apple. Here’s the explanation from the truth packed write up:

… it’s making it so HP peripherals connect automatically to HP PCs, a direction that resonates well with HP customers and mirrors an Apple-like approach

Will these HP devices connect to other peripherals or another company’s replacement ink cartridges? Hmmm.

Innovation 2: HP is into video conferencing. I wonder if the reference is to Zoom or the fascinating Microsoft Teams or Apple Facetime, among others? Here’s what the write up offers:

[An HP executive]  outlined how conference rooms needed to become more of a subscription business so that users didn’t constantly run into the problem of someone mucking with the setup and making the room unusable because of disconnected cables or damaged equipment.

Is HP pushing the envelope or racing to catch up with a trend from the Covid era?

Innovation 3: Ah, printers. Personally I am more interested in the HP ink lock down, but that’s just me. HP is now able to build stuff; specifically:

One of the most intriguing announcements at this event featured the Robotic Site Printer. This device converts a blueprint into a physical layout on a slab or floor, assisting construction workers in accurately placing building components before construction begins. When connected to a metaverse digital twin building effort, this little robot could be a game changer for construction by significantly reducing build errors.

Okay, what about the ink or latex or whatever. Isn’t ink from HP more costly than gold or some similar high value commodity?

Not a peep about the replacement cartridges. I wonder why I am bewildered. Innovation is being like Apple and innovating with big printers requiring I suppose giant proprietary ink cartridges. Oh, I don’t want to forget perplexed: Imitation is innovation. Okay.

By the way, the author of the write up was a research fellow at two mid tier consulting firms. Yep, objectivity is baked into the work process.

Stephen E Arnold, October 24, 2023

Vaporware: It Costs Little and May Pay Off Big

September 6, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_tNote: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

Since ChatGPT and assorted AI image-creation tools burst onto the scene, it seems generative AI is all anyone in the tech world can talk about. Some AI companies have been valued in the billions by those who expect trillion-dollar markets. But, asks Gary Marcus of Marcus on AI, “What if Generative AI Turned Out To Be a Dud?

Might it be the industry has leapt before looking? Marcus points out generative AI revenues are estimated in just the hundreds of millions so far. He describes reasons the field may never satisfy expectations, like pervasive bias, that pesky hallucination problem, and the mediocrity of algorithmic prose. He also notes people seem to be confusing generative AI with theoretical Artificial General Intelligence (AGI), which is actually much further from being realized. See the write-up for those details.

As disastrous as unrealized AI dreams may be for investors, Marcus is more concerned about policy decisions being made on pure speculation. He writes:

“On the global front, the Biden administration has both limited access to high-end hardware chips that are (currently) essential for generative AI, and limited investment in China; China’s not exactly being warm towards global cooperation either. Tensions are extremely high, and a lot of it to revolve around dreams about who might ‘win the AI war.’ But what if it the winner was nobody, at least not any time soon?”

On the national level, Marcus observes, important efforts to protect consumers from bias, misinformation, and privacy violations are being hampered by a perceived need to develop the technology as soon as possible. The post continues:

“We might not get the consumer protections we need, because we are trying to foster something that may not grow as expected. I am not saying anyone’s particular policies are wrong, but if the premise that generative AI is going to be bigger than fire and electricity turns out to be mistaken, or at least doesn’t bear out in the next decade, it’s certainly possible that we could wind up with what in hindsight is a lot of needless extra tension with China, possibly even a war in Taiwan, over a mirage, along with a social-media level fiasco in which consumers are exploited in news, and misinformation rules the day because governments were afraid to clamp down hard enough.”


Cynthia Murrell, September 6, 2023

A Wonderful Romp through a Tech Graveyard

August 31, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_tNote: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

I heard about a Web site called I took a look and what a walk down Memory Lane. You know Memory Lane. It runs close to the Information Superhighway. Are products smashed on the Info Highway? Some, not all.

The entry for ILoo, an innovation from the Softies was born and vaporized in 2003. Killedby describes the breakthrough this way:

iLoo was a smart portable toilet integrating the complete equipment to surf the Internet from inside and outside the cabinet.

I wonder how many van lifers would buy this product. Imagine the TikTok videos. That would keep the Oracle TikTok review team busy and probably provide some amusement for others as well.

And I had forgotten about Google’s weird response to failing to convince the US government to use the Googley search system for Ah, forward truncation — something Google would never ever do. The product/service was Google Public Service Search. Here’s what the tomb stone says:

Google Public Service Search provided governmental, non-profit and academic organizational search results without ads.

That idea bit the dust in 2006, which is the year I have pegged as the point at which Google went all-in on its cheerful, transparent business model. No ads! Imagine that!

I had forgotten about Google’s real time search play. Killedby says:

Google Real-Time Search provided live search results from Twitter, Facebook, and news websites.

I never learned why this was sent to the big digital dumpster behind the Google building on Shoreline. Rumor was that some news outfits and some social media Web sites were not impressed. Google — ever the trusted ad provider — hasta la vista to a social information metasearch.

Great site. I did not see Google Transformic, however. Killedby is quite good.

Stephen E Arnold, August 31, 2023

Google: Trapped in Its Own Walled Garden with Lots of Science Club Alums

August 30, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_tNote: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

I read “MapReduce, TensorFlow, Vertex: Google’s Bet to Avoid Repeating History in AI.” I found the idea that Google gets in its own way a retelling of how high school science club management produces interesting consequences.


A young technology wizard finds himself in a Hall of Mirrors at the carnival. He is not sure what is real or in which direction to go. The world of the House of Mirrors is disorienting. The young luminary wants to return to the walled garden where life is more comfortable. Thanks, MidJourney. Four tries and I get this tired illustration. Gradient descent time?

The write up asserts:

Google is in the middle of trying to avoid repeating history when releasing its industry-altering technology.

I disagree. The methods defining Google produce with remarkable consistency a lack of informed control. The idea is that organizations have a culture. That cultural evolves over time, but it remains anchored in its past. Thus, as the organization appears to move forward in time, that organization behaves in a predictable way; for example, Google has an approach to management which guarantees friction. Examples range from the staff protests to the lateral arabesque used to move Dr. Jeff Dean out of the way of the DeepMind contingent.

The write up takes a different view; for example:

Run by engineers, the [Google MapReduce] team essentially did not foresee the coming wave of open-source technology to power the modern Web and the companies that would come to commercialize it.

Google lacks the ability to perceive its opportunities. The company is fenced by its dependence on online advertising. Thus, innovations are tough for the Googlers to put into perspective. One reason is the high school science club ethos of the outfit; the other is that the outside world is as foreign to many Googlers as the world beyond the goldfish’s bowl filled with water. The view is distorted, surreal, and unfamiliar.

How can a company innovate and make a commercially viable product with this in its walled garden? It cannot. Advertising at Google is a me-too product for which Google prior to its IPO settled a dispute with Yahoo over the “inspiration” for pay-to-play search. The cost of this “inspiration” was about $1 billion.

In a quarter century, Google remains what one Microsoftie called “a one-trick pony.” Will the Google Cloud emerge as a true innovation? Nope. There are lots of clouds. Google is the Enterprise Rent-a-Car to the Hertz and Avis cloud rental firms. Google’s innovation track record is closer to a high school science club which has been able to win the state science club content year after year. Other innovators win the National Science Club Award (once called the Westinghouse Award). The context-free innovations are useful to others who have more agility and market instinct.

My view is that Google has become predictable, lurching from one technical paper to legal battle like a sine wave in a Physics 101 class; that is, a continuous wave with a smooth periodic function.

Don’t get me wrong. Google is an important company. What is often overlooked is the cultural wall that keeps the 100,000 smartest people in the world locked down in the garden. Innovation is constrained, and the excitement exists off the virtual campus. Why do so many Xooglers innovate and create interesting things once freed from the walled garden? Culture has strengths and weaknesses. Google’s muffing the bunny, as the article points out, is one defining characteristic of a company which longs for high school science club meetings and competitions with those like themselves.

Tony Bennett won’t be singing in the main cafeteria any longer, but the Googlers don’t care. He was an outsider, interesting but not in the science club. If the thought process doesn’t fit, you must quit.

Stephen E Arnold, August 30. 2023

TikTok: Ever Innovative and Classy Too

July 21, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

I have no idea if the write up is accurate. Without doing any deep thinking or even cursory research, the story seems so appropriate for our media environment. (I almost typed medio ambiente. Yikes. The dinobaby is really old on this hot Friday afternoon.)

7 14 entrepreneur in money

“Of course, I share money from videos of destitute people crying in inclement weather. It is the least I can do. I am working on a feature film now,” says the brilliant innovator who has his finger on the pulse of the TikTok viewer. The image of this paragon popped out of the MidJourney microwave quickly.

Here’s the title: “People on TikTok Are Paying Elderly Women to Sit in Stagnant Mud for Hours and Cry.” Yes, that’s the story. The write up states as actual factual:

Over hours, sympathetic viewers send “coins” and gifts that can be exchanged for cash, amounting to several hundred dollars per stream, says Sultan Akhyar, the man credited with inventing the trend. Emojis of gifts, roses, and well-wishes float up gently from the bottom of the live feed. The viral phenomenon known as mandi lumpur, or “mud baths,” gained notoriety in January when several livestreams were posted from Setanggor village …

Three quick observations:

  1. The classy vehicle for this entertainment is TikTok.
  2. Money is involved and shared immediately. Yep, immediately.
  3. Live video, the entertainment of the here-and-now.

I am waiting for the next innovation that takes crying in the mud to another level.

Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2023

Have You Heard the AI Joke about? Yeah, Over and Over Again

June 23, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

Developers have been unable to program one key facet of human intelligence into AI: a sense of humor. Oh, ChatGPT has jokes, but its repertoire is limited. And when asked to explain why something is or is not funny, it demonstrates it just doesn’t get it. Ars Technica informs us, “Researchers Discover that ChatGPT Prefers Repeating 25 Jokes Over and Over.”

6 17 jokes suck

A young person in the audience says to the standup comedian: “Hey, dude. Your jokes suck. Did an AI write them for you?” This illustration, despite my efforts to show the comedian getting bombarded with apple cores, bananas, and tomatoes, would only produce this sanitized image. It’s great, right? Thanks, MidJourney.

Reporter Benj Edwards writes:

“Two German researchers, Sophie Jentzsch and Kristian Kersting, released a paper that examines the ability of OpenAI’s ChatGPT-3.5 to understand and generate humor. In particular, they discovered that ChatGPT’s knowledge of jokes is fairly limited: During a test run, 90 percent of 1,008 generations were the same 25 jokes, leading them to conclude that the responses were likely learned and memorized during the AI model’s training rather than being newly generated.”

See the article, if curious, for the algorithm’s top 10 dad jokes and their frequencies within the 1,008 joke sample. There were a few unique jokes in the sample, but the AI seems to have created them by combining elements of others. And often, those mashups were pure nonsense. We learn:

“The researchers found that the language model’s original creations didn’t always make sense, such as, ‘Why did the man put his money in the blender? He wanted to make time fly.’ When asked to explain each of the 25 most frequent jokes, ChatGPT mostly provided valid explanations according to the researchers’ methodology, indicating an ‘understanding’ of stylistic elements such as wordplay and double meanings. However, it struggled with sequences that didn’t fit into learned patterns and couldn’t tell when a joke wasn’t funny. Instead, it would make up fictional yet plausible-sounding explanations.”

Plausible sounding, perhaps, but gibberish nonetheless. See the write-up for an example. ChatGPT simply does not understand what it means for something to be funny. Humor, after all, is a quintessentially human characteristic. Algorithms may get better at mimicking it, but we must never lose sight of the fact that AI is software, incapable of amusement. Or any other emotion. If we begin thinking of AI as human, we are in danger of forgetting the very real limits of machine learning as a lens on the world.

Cynthia Murrell, June 23, 2023

Neeva: Another Death from a Search Crash on the Information Highway

May 22, 2023

Vea4_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_thumb_t[1]Note: This essay is the work of a real and still-alive dinobaby. No smart software involved, just a dumb humanoid.

What will forensic search experts find when they examine the remains of Neeva? The “gee, we failed” essay “Next Steps for Neeva” presents one side of what might be an interesting investigation for a bushy tailed and wide eyed Gen Z search influencer. I noted some statements which may have been plucked from speeches at the original Search Engine Conferences ginned up by an outfit in the UK or academic post mortems at the old International Online Meeting once held in the companionable  Olympia London.

I noted these statements from the cited document:

Statement 1: The users of a Web search system

We started Neeva with the mission to take search back to its users.

The reality is that 99 percent of people using a Web search engine are happy when sort of accurate information is provided free. Yep, no one wants to pay for search. That’s the reason that when a commercial online service like LexisNexis loses one big client, it is expensive, time consuming, and difficulty to replace the revenue. One former LexisNexis big wheel told me when we met in his limousine in the parking lot of the Cherry Hill Mall: “If one of the top 100 law firms goes belly up, we need a minimum of 200 new law firms to sign up for our service and pay for it.”

5 12 mommy I failed

“Mommy, I failed Search,” says Timmy Neeva. Mrs. Neeva says, “What caused your delusional state, Timmy.” The art work is a result of the smart software MidJourney.

Users don’t care about for fee search when those users wouldn’t know whether a hit in a results list was right, mostly right, mostly wrong, or stupidly crazy. Free is the fuel that pulls users, and without advertising, there’s no chance a free service will be able to generate enough cash to index, update the index, and develop new features. At the same time, the plumbing is leaking. Plumbing repairs are expensive: New machines, new ways to reduce power consumption, and oodles of new storage devices.

Users want free. Users don’t want to compare the results from a for fee service and a free service. Users want free. After 25 years, the Google is the champion of free search. Like the old Xoogler search system Search2, Neeva’s wizards never figured that most users don’t care about Fancy Dan yip yap about search.

Statement 2: An answer engine.

We rallied the Neeva team around the vision to create an answer engine.

Shades of DR-LINK: Users want answers. In 1981, a former Predicasts’ executive named Paul Owen told me, “Dialog users want answers.” That sounds logical, and it is to many who are expert informationists the Gospel according to Online. The reality is that users want crunchy, bite sized chunks of information which appear to answer the question or almost right answers that are “good enough” or “close enough for horseshoes.”

Users cannot differentiate from correct and incorrect information. Heck, some developers of search engines don’t know the difference between weaponized information and content produced by a middle school teacher about the school’s graduation ceremony. Why? Weaponized information is abundant; non-weaponized information may not pass the user’s sniff test. And the middle school graduation ceremony may have a typo about the start time or the principal of the school changed his mind due to an active shooter situation. Something output from a computer is believed to be credible, accurate, and “right.” An answer engine is what a free Web search engine spits out. The TikTok search spits out answers, and no one wonders if the results list are shaped by Chinese interests.

Search and retrieval has been defined by Google. The company has a 90 plus percent share of the Web search traffic in North America and Western Europe. (In Denmark, the company has 99 percent of Danish users’ search traffic. People in Denmark are happier, and it is not because Google search delivers better or more accurate results. Google is free and it answers questions.

The baloney about it takes one-click to change search engines sounds great. The reality is as Neeva found out, no one wants to click away from what is perceived to work for them. Neeva’s yip yap about smart software proves that the jazz about artificial intelligence is unlikely to change how free Web search works in Google’s backyard. Samsung did not embrace Bing because users would rebel.

Answer engine. Baloney. Users want something free that will make life easier; for example, a high school student looking for a quick way to crank out a 250 word essay about global warming or how to make a taco. ChatGPT is not answering questions; the application is delivering something that is highly desirable to a lazy student. By the way, at least the lazy student had the git up and go to use a system to spit out a bunch of recycled content that is good enough. But an answer engine? No, an online convenience store is closer to the truth.

Statement 3:

We are actively exploring how we can apply our search and LLM expertise in these settings, and we will provide updates on the future of our work and our team in the next few weeks.

My interpretation of this statement is that a couple of Neeva professionals will become venture centric. Others will become consultants. A few will join the handful of big companies which are feverishly trying to use “smart software” to generate more revenue. Will there be some who end up working at Philz Coffee. Yeah, some. Perhaps another company will buy the “code,” but valuing something that failed is likely to prove tricky. Who remembers who bought Entopia? No one, right?

Net net: The GenZ forensic search failure exercise will produce some spectacular Silicon Valley news reporting. Neeva is explaining its failure, but that failure presaged when Fast Search & Transfer pivoted from Web search to the enterprise, failed, and was acquired by Microsoft. Where is Fast Search now as the smart Bing is soon to be everywhere. The reality is that Google has had 25 years to do cement its search monopoly. Neeva did not read the email. So Neeva sucked up investment bucks with a song and dance about zapping the Big Bad Google with a death ray. Yep, another example of high school science club mentality touched by spreadsheet fever.

Well, the fever broke.

Stephen E Arnold, May 22, 2023

Next Page »

  • Archives

  • Recent Posts

  • Meta