• Home
• About
• Writers
• Landscape
• Wizards Index
• Fraud
• Wanna Be Like Larry?

Microsoft: The Secure Discount King

Just a dinobaby sharing observations. No AI involved. My apologies to those who rely on it for their wisdom, knowledge, and insights.

Let’s assume that this story in The Register is dead accurate. Let’s forget that Google slapped the $0.47 smart software price tag on its Gemini smart software. Now let’s look at the interesting information in “Microsoft Rewarded for Security Failures with Another US Government Contract.” Snappy title. But check out the sub-title for the article: “Free Copilot for Any Agency Who Actually Wants It.”

I did not know that a US government agency was human signaled by the “who.” But let’s push forward.

The article states:

The General Services Administration (GSA) announced its new deal with Microsoft on Tuesday, describing it as a “strategic partnership” that could save the federal government as much as $3.1 billion over the next year. The GSA didn’t mention specific discount terms, but it said that services, including Microsoft 365, Azure cloud services, Dynamics 365, Entra ID Governance, and Microsoft Sentinel, will be cheaper than ever for feds.  That, and Microsoft’s next-gen Clippy, also known as Copilot, is free to access for any agency with a G5 contract as part of the new deal, too. That free price undercuts Google’s previously cheapest-in-show deal to inject Gemini into government agencies for just $0.47 for a year.

Will anyone formulate the hypothesis that Microsoft and Google are providing deep discounts to get government deals and the every-popular scope changes, engineering services, and specialized consulting fees?

I would not.

I quite like comparing Microsoft’s increasingly difficult to explain OpenAI, acqui-hire, and home-grown smart software as Clippy. I think that the more apt comparison is the outstanding Microsoft Bob solution to interface complexity.

The article explains that Oracle landed contracts with a discount, then Google, and now Microsoft. What about the smaller firms? Yeah, there are standard procurement guidelines for those outfits. Follow the rules and stop suggesting that giant companies are discounting there way into the US government.

What happens if these solutions hallucinate, do not deliver what an Inspector General, an Independent Verification & Validation team, or the General Accounting Office expects? Here’s the answer:

With the exception of AWS, all the other OneGov deals that have been announced so far have a very short shelf life, with most expirations at the end of 2026. Critics of the OneGov program have raised concerns that OneGov deals have set government agencies up for a new era of vendor lock-in not seen since the early cloud days, where one-year discounts leave agencies dependent on services that could suddenly become considerably more expensive by the end of next year.

The write up quotes one smaller outfit’s senior manager’s concern about low prices. But the deals are done, and the work on the 2026-2027 statements of work has begun, folks. Small outfits often lack the luxury of staff dedicated to extending a service provider’s engagement into a year or two renewal target.

The write up concludes by bringing up ancient history like those pop archaeologists on YouTube who explain that ancient technology created urns with handles. The write up says:

It was mere days ago that we reported on the Pentagon’s decision to formally bar Microsoft from using China-based engineers to support sensitive cloud services deployed by the Defense Department, a practice Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called “mind-blowing” in a statement last week.  Then there was last year’s episodes that allowed Chinese and Russian cyber spies to break into Exchange accounts used by high-level federal officials and steal a whole bunch of emails and other information. That incident, and plenty more before it, led former senior White House cyber policy director AJ Grotto to conclude that Microsoft was an honest-to-goodness national security threat. None of that has mattered much, as the feds seem content to continue paying Microsoft for its services, despite wagging their finger at Redmond for “avoidable errors.”

Ancient history or aliens? I don’t know. But Microsoft does deals, and it is tough to resist “free”.

Stephen E Arnold, September 10, 2025

Dr. Bob Clippy Will See You Now

I cannot wait for AI to replace my trusted human physician whom I’ve been seeing for years. “Microsoft Claims its AI Tool Can Diagnose Complex Medical Cases Four Times More Accurately than Doctors,” Fortune reports. The company made this incredible claim in a recent blog post. How did it determine this statistic? By taking the usual resources away from human doctors it pitted against its AI. Senior Reporter Alexa Mikhail tells us:

“The team at Microsoft noted the limitations of this research. For one, the physicians in the study had between five and 20 years of experience, but were unable to use textbooks, coworkers, or—ironically—generative AI for their answers. It could have limited their performance, as these resources may typically be available during a complex medical situation.”

You don’t say? Additionally, the study did not include everyday cases. You know, the sort doctors do not need to consult books or coworkers to diagnose. Seems legit. Microsoft says it sees the tool as a complement to doctors, not a replacement for them. That sounds familiar.

Mikahil notes AI already permeates healthcare: Most of us have looked up symptoms with AI-assisted Web searches. ChatGPT is actively being used as a psychotherapist (sometimes for better, often for worse). Many healthcare executives are eager to take this much, much further. So are about half of US patients and 63% of clinicians, according to the 2025 Philips Future Health Index (FHI), who expect AI to improve health outcomes. We hope they are correct, because there may be no turning back now.

Cynthia Murrell, September 8, 2025

AI Words Are the Surface: The Deeper Thought Embedding Is the Problem with AI

This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. Sorry. No smart software can help this reptilian thinker. 

Humans are biased. Content generated by humans reflects these mental patterns. Smart software is probabilistic. So what?

Select the content to train smart software. The more broadly the content base, the greater range of biases will be baked into the Fancy Dan software. Then toss in the human developers who make decisions about thresholds, weights, and rounding. Mix in the wrapper code that does the guardrails which are created by humans with some of those biases, attitudes, and idiosyncratic mental equipment.

Then provide a system to students and people eager to get more done with less effort and what do you get? A partial and important glimpse of the consequences of about 2.5 years of AI as the next big thing are presented in “On-Screen and Now IRL: FSU Researchers Find Evidence of ChatGPT Buzzwords Turning Up in Everyday Speech.”

The write up reports:

“The changes we are seeing in spoken language are pretty remarkable, especially when compared to historical trends,” Juzek said. “What stands out is the breadth of change: so many words are showing notable increases over a relatively short period. Given that these are all words typically overused by AI, it seems plausible to conjecture a link.”

Conjecture. That’s a weasel word. Once words are embedded they dragged a hard sided carry on with them.

The write up adds:

“Our research highlights many important ethical questions,” Galpin said. “With the ability of LLMs to influence human language comes larger questions about how model biases and misalignment, or differences in behavior in LLMs, may begin to influence human behaviors.”

As more research data become available, I project that several factoids will become points of discussion:

1. What happens when AI outputs are weaponized for political, personal, or financial gain?
2. How will people consuming AI outputs recognize that their vocabulary and the attendant “value baggage” is along for the life journey?
3. What type of mental remapping can be accomplished with shaped AI output?

For now, students are happy to let AI think for them. In the future, will that warm, fuzzy feeling persist. If ignorance is bliss, I say, “Hello, happy.”

Stephen E  Arnold, September 3, 2025

Copilot, Can You Crash That Financial Analysis?

No AI. Just a dinobaby working the old-fashioned way.

The ever-insouciant online service The Verge published a story about Microsoft, smart software, and Excel. “Microsoft Excel Adds Copilot AI to Help Fill in Spreadsheet Cells” reports:

Microsoft Excel is testing a new AI-powered function that can automatically fill cells in your spreadsheets, which is similar to the feature that Google Sheets rolled out in June.

Okay, quite specific intentionality: Fill in cells. And a dash of me-too. I like it.

However, the key statement in my opinion is:

The COPILOT function comes with a couple of limitations, as it can’t access information outside your spreadsheet, and you can only use it to calculate 100 functions every 10 minutes. Microsoft also warns against using the AI function for numerical calculations or in “high-stakes scenarios” with legal, regulatory, and compliance implications, as COPILOT “can give incorrect responses.”

I don’t want to make a big deal out of this passage, but I will do it anyway. First, Microsoft makes clear that the outputs can be incorrect. Second, don’t use it too much because I assume one will have to pay to use a system that “can give incorrect results.” In short, MSFT is throttling Excel’s Copilot. Doesn’t everyone want to explore numbers with an addled Copilot known to flub numbers in a jet aircraft at 0.8 Mach?

I want to quote from “It Took Many Years And Billions Of Dollars, But Microsoft Finally Invented A Calculator That Is Wrong Sometimes”:

Think of it. Forty-five hundred years ago, if you were a Sumerian scribe, while your calculations on the world’s first abacus might have been laborious, you could be assured they’d be correct. Four hundred years ago, if you were palling around with William Oughtred, his new slide rule may have been a bit intimidating at first, but you could know its output was correct. In the 1980s, you could have bought the cheapest, shittiest Casio-knockoff calculator you could find, and used it exclusively, for every day of the rest of your life, and never once would it give anything but a correct answer. You could use it today! But now we have Microsoft apparently determining that “unpredictability” was something that some number of its customers wanted in their calculators.

I know that I sure do. I want to use a tool that is likely to convert “high-stakes scenarios” into an embarrassing failure. I mean who does not want this type of digital Copilot?

Why do I find this Excel with Copilot software interesting?

1. It illustrates that accuracy has given way to close enough for horseshoes. Impressive for a company that can issue an update that could kill one’s storage devices.
2. Microsoft no longer dances around hallucinations. The company just says, “The outputs can be wrong.” But I wonder, “Does Microsoft really mean it?” What about Red Bull-fueled MBAs handling one’s retirement accounts? Yeah, those people will be really careful.
3. The article does not come and and say, “Looks like the AI rocket ship is losing altitude.”
4. I cannot imagine sitting in a meeting and observing the rationalizations offered to justify releasing a product known to make NUMERICAL errors.

Net net: We are learning about the quality of [a] managerial processes at Microsoft, [b] the judgment of employees, and [c] the sheer craziness that an attorney said, “Sure, release the product just include an upfront statement that it will make mistakes.” Nothing builds trust more than a company anchored in customer-centric values.

Stephen E Arnold, August 22, 2025

The Bubbling Pot of Toxic Mediocrity? Microsoft LinkedIn. Who Knew?

No AI. Just a dinobaby working the old-fashioned way.

Microsoft has a magic touch. The company gets into Open Source; the founder “gits” out. Microsoft hires a person from Intel. Microsoft hires garners an engineer, asks some questions, and the new hire is whipped with a $34,000 fine and two years of mom looking in his drawers.

Now i read “Sunny Days Are Warm: Why LinkedIn Rewards Mediocrity.” The write up includes an outstanding metaphor in my opinion: Toxic Mediocrity. The write up says:

The vast majority of it falls into a category I would describe as Toxic Mediocrity. It’s soft, warm and hard to publicly call out but if you’re not deep in the bubble it reads like nonsense. Unlike it’s cousins ‘Toxic Positivity’ and ‘Toxic Masculinity’ it isn’t as immediately obvious. It’s content that spins itself as meaningful and insightful while providing very little of either. Underneath the one hundred and fifty words is, well, nothing. It’s a post that lets you know that sunny days are warm or its better not to be a total psychopath. What is anyone supposed to learn from that?

When I read a LinkedIn post it is usually referenced in an article I am reading. I like to follow these modern slippery footnotes. (If you want slippery, try finding interesting items about Pavel Durov in certain Russian sources.)

Here’s what I learn:

1. A “member” makes clear that he or she has information of value. I must admit. Once in a while a useful post will turn up. Not often, but it has happened. I do know the person believes something about himself or herself. Try asking a GenAI about their personal “beliefs.” Let me know how that works.
2. Members in a specific group with an active moderator often post items of interest. Instead of writing my unread blog, these individuals identify an item and use LinkedIn as a “digital bulletin board” for people who shop at the same sporting goods store in rural Kentucky. (One sells breakfast items and weapons.)
3. I get a sense of the jargon people use to explain their expertise. I work alone. I am writing a book. I don’t travel to conferences or client locations now. I rely on LinkedIn as the equivalent of going to a conference mixer and listening to the conversations.

That useful. I have a person who interacts on LinkedIn for me. I suppose my “experience” is therefore different from someone who visits the site, posts, and follows the antics of LinkedIn’s marketers as they try to get the surrogate me to pay to do what I do. (Guess what? I don’t pay.)

I noted this statement in the essay:

Honestly, the best approach is to remember that LinkedIn is a website owned by Microsoft, trying to make money for Microsoft, based on time spent on the site. Nothing you post there is going to change your career. Doing work that matters might. Drawing attention to that might. Go for depth over frequency.

I know that many people rely on LinkedIn to boost their self confidence. One of the people who worked for me moved to another city. I suggested that she give LinkedIn a whirl. She wrote interesting short items about her interests. She got good feedback. Her self confidence ticked up, and she landed a successful job. So there’s a use case for you.

You should be able to find a short item that a new post appears on my blog. Write me and my surrogate will write you back and give you instructions about how to contact me. Why don’t I conduct conversations on LinkedIn? Have you checked out the telemetry functions in Microsoft software?

Stephen E Arnold, August 19, 2025

A Baloney Blizzard: What Is Missing? Oh, Nothing, Just Security

This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. Sorry. No smart software can help this reptilian thinker.

I do not know what a CVP is. I do know a baloney blizzard when I see one. How about these terms: Ambient, pervasive, and multi-modal. I interpret ambient as meaning temperature or music like the tunes honked in Manhattan elevators. Pervasive I view as surveillance; that is, one cannot escape the monitoring. What a clever idea. Who doesn’t want Microsoft Windows to be inescapable? And multi-modal sparks in me thoughts of a cave painting and a shaman. I like the idea of Windows intermediating for me.

Where did I get these three odd ball words? I read “Microsoft’s Windows Lead Says the Next Version of Windows Will Be More Ambient, Pervasive, and Multi-Modal As AI Redefines the Desktop Interface.” The source of this write up is an organization that absolutely loves Microsoft products and services.

Here’s a passage I noted:

Davuluri confirms that in the wake of AI, Windows is going to change significantly. The OS is going to become more ambient and multi-modal, capable of understanding the content on your screen at all times to enable context-aware capabilities that previously weren’t possible. Davuluri continues, “you’ll be able to speak to your computer while you’re writing, inking, or interacting with another person. You should be able to have a computer semantically understand your intent to interact with it.”

Very sci-fi. However, I don’t want to speak to my computer. I work in silence. My office is set up do I don’t have people interrupting, chattering, or asking me to go to get donuts. My view is, “Send me an email or a text. Don’t bother me.” Is that why in many high-tech companies people wear earbuds? It is. They don’t want to talk, interact, or discuss Netflix. These people want to “work” or what they think is “work.”

Does Microsoft care? Of course not. Here’s a reasonably clear statement of what Microsoft is going to try and force upon me:

It’s clear that whatever is coming next for Windows, it’s going to promote voice as a first class input method on the platform. In addition to mouse and keyboard, you will be able to ambiently talk to Windows using natural language while you work, and have the OS understand your intent based on what’s currently on your screen.

Several observations:

1. AI is not reliable
2. Microsoft is running a surveillance operation in my opinion
3. This is the outfit which created Bob and Clippy.

But the real message in this PR marketing content essay: Security is not mentioned. Does a secure operation want people talking about their work?

Stephen E Arnold, August 19, 2025

Microsoft: Knee Jerk Management Enigma

This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. Sorry. Not even smart software can help this reptilian thinker.

I read “In New Memo, Microsoft CEO Addresses Enigma of Layoffs Amid Record Profits and AI Investments.” The write up says in a very NPR-like soft voice:

“This is the enigma of success in an industry that has no franchise value,” he wrote. “Progress isn’t linear. It’s dynamic, sometimes dissonant, and always demanding. But it’s also a new opportunity for us to shape, lead through, and have greater impact than ever before.” The memo represents Nadella’s most direct attempt yet to reconcile the fundamental contradictions facing Microsoft and many other tech companies as they adjust to the AI economy. Microsoft, in particular, has been grappling with employee discontent and internal questions about its culture following multiple rounds of layoffs.

Discontent. Maybe the summer of discontent. No, it’s a reshaping or re-invention of a play by William Shakespeare (allegedly) which borrows from Chaucer’s Troilus and Criseyde with a bit more emphasis on pettiness and corruption to add spice to Boccaccio’s antecedent. Willie’s Troilus and Cressida makes the “love affair” more ironic.

Ah, the Microsoft drama. Let’s recap: [a] Troilus and Cressida’s Two Kids: Satya and Sam, [b] Security woes of SharePoint (who knew? eh, everyone]; [c] buying green credits or how much manure does a gondola rail card hold? [d] Copilot (are the fuel switches on? Nope); and [e] layoffs.

What’s the description of these issues? An enigma. This is a word popping up frequently it seems. An enigma is, according to Venice, a smart software system:

The word “enigma” derives from the Greek “ainigma” (meaning “riddle” or “dark saying”), which itself stems from the verb “aigin” (“to speak darkly” or “to speak in riddles”). It entered Latin as “aenigma”, then evolved into Old French as “énigme” before being adopted into English in the 16th century. The term originally referred to a cryptic or allegorical statement requiring interpretation, later broadening to describe any mysterious, puzzling, or inexplicable person or thing. A notable modern example is the Enigma machine, a cipher device used in World War II, named for its perceived impenetrability. The shift from “riddle” to “mystery” reflects its linguistic journey through metaphorical extension.

Okay, let’s work through this definition.

1. Troilus and Cressida or Satya and Sam. We have a tortured relationship. A bit of a war among the AI leaders, and a bit of the collapse of moral certainty. The play seems to be going nowhere. Okay, that fits.
2. Security woes. Yep, the cipher device in World War II. Its security or lack of it contributed to a number of unpleasant outcomes for a certain nation state associated with beer and Rome’s failure to subjugate some folks.
3. Manure. This seems to be a metaphorical extension. Paying “green” or money for excrement is a remarkable image. Enough said.
4. Fuel switches and the subsequent crash, explosion, and death of some hapless PowerPoint users. This lines up with “puzzling.” How did those Word paragraphs just flip around? I didn’t do it. Does anyone know why? Of course not.
5. Layoffs. Ah, an allegorical statement. Find your future elsewhere. There is a demand for life coaches, LinkedIn profile consultants, and lawn service workers.

Microsoft is indeed speaking darkly. The billions burned in the AI push have clouded the atmosphere in Softie Land. When the smoke clears, what will remain? My thought is that the items a to e mentioned above are going to leave some obvious environmental alterations. Yep, dark saying because knee jerk reactions are good enough.

Stephen E Arnold, July 29, 2025

What Did You Tay, Bob? Clippy Did What!

This blog post is the work of an authentic dinobaby. Sorry. No smart software can help this reptilian thinker.

I was delighted to read “OpenAI Is Eating Microsoft’s Lunch.” I don’t care who or what wins the great AI war. So many dollars have been bet that hallucinating software is the next big thing. Most content flowing through my dinobaby information system is political. I think this food story is a refreshing change.

So what’s for lunch? The write up seems to suggest that Sam AI-Man has not only snagged a morsel from the Softies’ lunch pail but Sam AI-Man might be prepared to snap at those delicate lady fingers too. The write up says:

ChatGPT has managed to rack up about 10 times the downloads that Microsoft’s Copilot has received.

Are these data rock solid? Probably not, but the idea that two “partners” who forced Googzilla to spasm each time its Code Red lights flashed are not cooperating is fascinating. The write up points out that when Microsoft and OpenAI were deeply in love, Microsoft had the jump on the smart software contenders. The article adds:

Despite that [early lead], Copilot sits in fourth place when it comes to total installations. It trails not only ChatGPT, but Gemini and Deepseek.

Shades of Windows phone. Another next big thing muffed by the bunnies in Redmond. How could an innovation power house like Microsoft fail in the flaming maelstrom of burning cash that is AI? Microsoft’s long history of innovation adds a turbo boost to its AI initiatives. The Bob, Clippy, and Tay inspired Copilot is available to billions of Microsoft Windows users. It is … everywhere.

The write up explains the problem this way:

Copilot’s lagging popularity is a result of mismanagement on the part of Microsoft.

This is an amazing insight, isn’t it? Here’s the stunning wrap up to the article:

It seems no matter what, Microsoft just cannot make people love its products. Perhaps it could try making better ones and see how that goes.

To be blunt, the problem at Microsoft is evident in many organizations. For example, we could ask IBM Watson what Microsoft should do. We could fire up Deepseek and get some China-inspired insight. We could do a Google search. No, scratch that. We could do a Yandex.ru search and ask, “Microsoft AI strategy repair.”

I have a more obvious dinobaby suggestion, “Make Microsoft smaller.” And play well with others. Silly ideas I know.

Stephen E Arnold, July 21, 2025

Microsoft Innovation: Emulating the Bold Interface Move by Apple?

This dinobaby wrote this tiny essay without any help from smart software. Not even hallucinating gradient descents can match these bold innovations.

Bold. Decisive. Innovative. Forward leaning. Have I covered the adjectives used to communicate “real” innovation? I needed these and more to capture my reaction to the information in “Forget the Blue Screen of Death – Windows Is Replacing It with an Even More Terrifying Black Screen of Death.”

Yep, terrifying. I don’t feel terrified when my monitors display a warning. I guess some people do.

The write up reports:

Microsoft is replacing the Windows 11 Blue Screen of Death (BSoD) with a Black Screen of Death, after decades of the latter’s presence on multiple Windows iterations. It apparently wants to provide more clarity and concise information to help troubleshoot user errors easily.

The important aspect of this bold decision to change the color of an alert screen may be Apple color envy.

Apple itself said, “Apple Introduces a Delightful and Elegant New Software Design.” The innovation was… changing colors and channeling Windows Vista.

Let’s recap. Microsoft makes an alert screen black. Apple changes its colors.

Peak innovation. I guess that is what happens when artificial intelligence does not deliver.

Stephen E Arnold, July 2, 2025

Microsoft and OpenAI: An Expensive Sitcom

No smart software involved. Just an addled dinobaby.

I remember how clever I thought the book title “Who Says Elephants Can’t Dance?: Leading a Great Enterprise Through Dramatic Change.” I find the break dancing content between Microsoft and OpenAI even more amusing. Bloomberg “real” news reported that Microsoft is “struggling to sell its Copilot solutions. Why? Those Microsoft customers want OpenAI’s ChatGPT. That’s a hoot.

Computerworld adds to this side show more Monte Python twists. “Microsoft and OpenAI: Will They Opt for the Nuclear Option?” (I am not too keen on the use of the word “nuclear.” People bandy it about without understanding exactly what the actual consequences of such an opton means. Please, do a bit of homework before suggesting that two enterprises are doing anything remotely similar.)

The estimable Computerworld reports:

Microsoft needs access to OpenAI technologies to keep its worldwide lead in AI and grow its valuation beyond its current more than $3.5 trillion. OpenAI needs Microsoft to sign a deal so the company can go public via an IPO. Without an IPO, the company isn’t likely to keep its highly valued AI researchers — they’ll probably be poached by companies willing to pay hundreds of millions of dollars for the talent.

The problem seems to be that Microsoft is trying to sell its version of smart software. The enterprise customers and even dinobabies like myself prefer the hallucinatory and unpredictable ChatGPT to the downright weirdness of Copilot in Notepad. The Computerworld story says:

Hovering over it all is an even bigger wildcard. Microsoft’s and OpenAI’s existing agreement dramatically curtails Microsoft’s rights to OpenAI technologies if the technologies reach what is called artificial general intelligence (AGI) — the point at which AI becomes capable of human reasoning. AGI wasn’t defined in that agreement. But Altman has said he believes AGI might be reached as early as this year.

People cannot agree over beach rights and school taxes. The smart software (which may remain without regulation for a decade) is a much bigger deal. The dollars at stake are huge. Most people do not know that a Board of Directors for a Fortune 1000 company will spend more time arguing about parking spaces than a $300 million acquisition. The reason? Most humans cannot conceive of the numbers of dollars associated with artificial intelligence. If the AI next big thing does not work, quite a few outfits are going to be selling snake oil from tables at flea markets.

Here’s the humorous twist from my vantage point. Microsoft itself kicked off the AI boom with its announcements a couple of years ago. Google, already wondering how it can keep the money gushing to pay the costs of simply being Google, short circuited and hit the switch for Code Red, Yellow, Orange, and probably the color only five people on earth have ever seen.

And what’s happened? The Google-spawned methods aren’t eliminating hallucinations. The OpenAI methods are not eliminating hallucinations. The improvements are more and more difficult to explain. Meanwhile start ups are doing interesting things with AI systems that are good enough for certain use cases. I particularly like consulting and investment firms using AI to get rid of MBAs.

The punch line for this joke is that the Microsoft version of ChatGPT seems to have more brand deliciousness. Microsoft linked with OpenAI, created its own “line of AI,” and now finds that the frisky money burner OpenAI is more popular and can just define artificial general intelligence to its liking and enjoy the philosophical discussions among AI experts and lawyers.

One cannot make this sequence up. Jack Benny’s radio scripts came close, but I think the Microsoft – OpenAI program is a prize winner.

Stephen E Arnold, July 1, 2025

Next Page »

• 

• Search the site

•  

  Subscribe to Beyond Search

  • 
  • 
   
  • 
   
  
  Feature archive
  News archive
   
  
  
  Stephen E. Arnold monitors search, content processing, text mining and related topics from his high-tech nerve center in rural Kentucky. He tries to winnow the goose feathers from the giblets. He works with colleagues worldwide to make this Web log useful to those who want to go "beyond search". Contact him at sa [at] arnoldit.com. His Web site with additional information about search is arnoldit.com.

• Categories

  • 3D-Printing
  • Acquisition
  • Advertising
  • Aggregation
  • AI
  • Alexa
  • algorithms
  • Amazon
  • Amazonia
  • Analytics
  • Appliance
  • Applications
  • Audio
  • Augmented Reality
  • Big data
  • Bing
  • Bitcoin
  • Bitext
  • Book review
  • Business intelligence
  • Business process
  • Business strategy
  • Censorship
  • Cloud computing
  • Company Profile
  • Conferences
  • Connectors
  • Consulting
  • Consumer
  • Content processing
  • Copyright
  • Corporate Concerns
  • Cost
  • Crawl
  • Crowdfunding
  • cryptocurrency
  • Customer support
  • Cyber OSINT
  • cybercrime
  • cybersecurity
  • Dark Web
  • DarkCyber
  • Data
  • Data mining
  • Database
  • Deepfakes
  • Digital Assistant
  • Digital Library
  • E2EE
  • ECommerce
  • EDiscovery
  • Editorial opinion
  • Education
  • Emoticons
  • Enterprise
  • Enterprise search
  • Entity extraction
  • Ethics
  • Facebook
  • Faceted search
  • Factualities
  • Feature
  • Federated search
  • Financial
  • Fogint
  • Google
  • Governance
  • Government
  • Hackers
  • healthcare
  • IBM Watson
  • Image search
  • Indexing
  • Infrastructure
  • Innovation
  • Integration
  • intelware
  • Interface
  • Internet
  • Interview
  • Investment
  • law enforcement
  • Legal matters
  • Library automation
  • Management
  • Marketing
  • Mathematics
  • Metadata
  • Microsoft
  • Mobile
  • Natural language processing
  • News
  • NGIA
  • Online (general)
  • Open Access
  • Open source
  • OSINT
  • Osint Radar
  • Overflight
  • Palantir
  • Patents
  • Personnel
  • Podcast
  • Policeware
  • Portals
  • Predictive coding
  • Privacy
  • Profile
  • Publishing
  • Quotation
  • Real time search
  • Reference tool
  • Rich media
  • Robot Writer
  • Search
  • Search enabled applications
  • search engine
  • Search quality
  • Security
  • Semantic
  • Sentiment analysis
  • SEO
  • SharePoint
  • Short Honks
  • Smart Technology
  • Social
  • Social Media
  • software
  • Statistics
  • Taxonomy
  • Technology
  • Text analytics
  • Text processing
  • Tools
  • Tor
  • Training
  • Translation
  • Twitter
  • Uncategorized
  • Unstructured Data
  • User experience
  • User Interface
  • Vertical search
  • Video
  • visualization
  • Voice search
  • Voice technology
  • Web 3
  • Web Services
  • Webinar
  • Windows
  • Work flow
  • XML
  • Yahoo

• Archives

  Archives Select Month September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 November 5

• Recent Posts

  • AI Search Is Great. Believe It. Now!
  • AI Maggots: Are These Creatures Killing the Web?
  • AI and Security? What? Huh?
  • IBM Technology Atlas: A Buzzword Blow Up
  • Qwen: Better, Faster, Cheaper. Sure, All Three

• Meta

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org