Microsoft Drops Bing from Pulse, Adds Azure Media Services
December 22, 2015
The article on VentureBeat titled Microsoft Rebrands Bing Pulse to Microsoft Pulse, extends Snapshot API ushers in the question: is Bing a dead-end brand? The article states that the rebranding is meant to emphasize that the resource integrates with MS technologies like Power BI, OneNote, and Azure Media Services. It has only been about year since the original self-service tool was released for broadcast TV and media companies. The article states,
“The launch comes a year after Bing Pulse hit version 2.0 with the introduction of a cloud-based self-service option. Microsoft is today showing a few improvements to the tool, including a greatly enhanced Snapshot application programming interface (API) that allows developers to pull data from Microsoft Pulse into Microsoft’s own Power BI tool or other business intelligence software. Previously it was only possible to use the API with broadcast-specific technologies.”
The news isn’t good for Bing, with Pulse gaining popularity as a crowdsourcing resource among such organizations as CNN, CNBC, the Aspen Institute, and the Clinton Global Initiative. It is meant to be versatile and targeted for broadcast, events, market research, and classroom use. Dropping Bing from the name may indicate that Pulse is moving forward, and leaving Bing in the dust.
Chelsea Kerwin, December 22, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
How Multitasking Alters Our Brains
December 22, 2015
An article at Forbes, “Is Technology Making Us Dumb and Numb?” brings neuroscience to bear on the topic, and the conclusion is not pretty. Contributor Christine Comaford, who regularly writes about neuroscience in relation to leadership, tells us:
“Multitasking reduces gray matter density in the area of the brain called the Anterior Cingulate Cortex (ACC)…. The ACC is involved in a number of cognitive and emotional functions including reward anticipation, decision-making, empathy, impulse control, and emotion. It acts like a hub for processing and assigning control to other areas of the brain, based on whether the messages are cognitive (dorsal) or emotional (ventral). So when we have reduced gray matter density in the ACC due to high media multitasking, over time we see reduced ability to make sound decisions, to modulate our emotions, to have empathy and to connect emotionally to others.”
Hmm, is that why our national discourse has become so uncivil in recent years? See the article for a more detailed description of the ACC and the functionality of its parts. Maybe if we all kick the multitasking habit, the world will be a slightly kinder place.
Cynthia Murrell, December 22, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Getting Smart About Cutting the Cable Cord
December 21, 2015
A few years ago, I read an article about someone who was fed up with streaming content because he wanted new shows and access to all the channels so they resubscribed to cable. I have to admit the easiest thing to do would be to pay a monthly cable bill and shell out additional fees for the premiere channels. The only problem is that cable and extra channels are quite expensive. It has since become easier to cut the cord.
One of the biggest problems viewers face is finding specific and new content. Netflix, Hulu, iTunes, and Amazon Prime are limited with licenses and their individual content and having to search each one is time consuming. Even worse is trying to type out a series name using a remote control instead of a keyboard. Technology to the rescue!
The Verge talks about “Yahoo’s New App Is A TV Guide For Cord Cutters” called Yahoo Video Guide that allows viewers to search by a name and instantly watch it.
“Whenever users find what they want to watch, they can click a button to “Stream Now,” and the app will automatically launch a subscription service that hosts the film. If the program isn’t available online, users can buy it, instead.”
The coolest feature is that if viewers want to channel surf all they do so with GIFs. The viewer picks a GIF that fits their mood and the app will sort out content from there.
Finally, all those moving images have a different function than entertaining reddit users.
Whitney Grace, December 21, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Plentiful, Presaging Prognostications
December 19, 2015
I read a roll up type article. “Industry Speaks: Top 33 Big Data Predictions for 2016” presents a fulsome suite of forecasts about 2016’s technology trends. If you are a fan of the race track tout approach to winners, you will want to print out this article and keep it with you.
I would love to comment on each prediction, but that, gentle reader, is a lot of work. I would prefer to return to my analysis of Palantir.
I did circle three of the predictions which I found somewhat intriguing. My hope is that you will want to dig deeply into the other 30 future forward conjectures. Here we go:
- Big Data will die. My hunch is that one would have to kill off the PR spouting spawn of marketing and sales departments before the monster of Big Data is tamed. Nice effort, bold prediction. My view is that it is pretty loco given the present environment.
- Companies will hire chief insight officers. Wow. My view is that folks struggling to deliver revenues will change their titles. I am not sure that human resources will work hand in glove with senior executives to hire a new person to be in charge of “insight.” I thought business intelligence software delivered this insight stuff.
- Spark will kill Hadoop. Interesting. I assume I was incorrect in thinking that Hadoop could be thought of as a variant of Google’s really old MapReduce technology. Hadoop is a bit of a challenge, but “killing” seems a bit of a stretch.
For the other 30 previsons, check out the original. Amazing stuff. Most of the horoscopes are like newspaper horoscopes; that is, data free.
Stephen E Arnold, December 19, 2015
Old School Mainframes Still Key to Big Data
December 17, 2015
According to ZDNet, “The Ultimate Answer to the Handling of Big Data: The Mainframe.” Believe it or not, a recent survey of 187 IT pros from Syncsort found the mainframe to be the important to their big data strategy. IBM has even created a Hadoop-capable mainframe. Reporter Ken Hess lists some of the survey’s findings:
*More than two-thirds of respondents (69 percent) ranked the use of the mainframe for performing large-scale transaction processing as very important
*More than two-thirds (67.4 percent) of respondents also pointed to integration with other standalone computing platforms such as Linux, UNIX, or Windows as a key strength of mainframe
*While the majority (79 percent) analyze real-time transactional data from the mainframe with a tool that resides directly on the mainframe, respondents are also turning to platforms such as Splunk (11.8 percent), Hadoop (8.6 percent), and Spark (1.6 percent) to supplement their real-time data analysis […]
*82.9 percent and 83.4 percent of respondents cited security and availability as key strengths of the mainframe, respectively
*In a weighted calculation, respondents ranked security and compliance as their top areas to improve over the next 12 months, followed by CPU usage and related costs and meeting Service Level Agreements (SLAs)
*A separate weighted calculation showed that respondents felt their CIOs would rank all of the same areas in their top three to improve
Hess goes on to note that most of us probably utilize mainframes without thinking about it; whenever we pull cash out of an ATM, for example. The mainframe’s security and scalability remain unequaled, he writes, by any other platform or platform cluster yet devised. He links to a couple of resources besides the Syncsort survey that support this position: a white paper from IBM’s Big Data & Analytics Hub and a report from research firm Forrester.
Cynthia Murrell, December 17, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Easy as 1,2,3 Common Mistakes Made with Data Lakes
December 15, 2015
The article titled Avoiding Three Common Pitfalls of Data Lakes on DataInformed explores several pitfalls that could negate the advantages of data lakes. The article begins with the perks, such as easier data access and of course, the cost-effectiveness of keeping data in a single hub. The first is sustainability (or the lack thereof), since the article emphasizes that data lakes actually require much more planning and management of data than conventional databases. The second pitfall raised is resource allocation,
“Another common pitfall of implementing data lakes arises when organizations need data scientists, who are notoriously scarce, to generate value from these hubs. Because data lakes store data in their native format, it is common for data scientists to spend as much as 80 percent of their time on basic data preparation. Consequently, many of the enterprise’s most valued resources are dedicated to mundane, time-consuming processes that considerably lengthen time to action on potentially time-sensitive big data.“
The third pitfall is technology contradictions or trying to use traditional approaches on a data lake that holds both big and unstructured data. Be not alarmed, however, the article goes into great detail about how to avoid these issues through data lake development with smart data technologies such as semantic tech.
Chelsea Kerwin, December 15, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
Holiday Rumor: Lexmark and Possible Misprints
December 14, 2015
Holiday festivities in Kentucky feature good cheer and bourbon. The combination yields interesting behavior and rumors. At a hoe down this weekend, one tippler talked about Lexmark, the progeny of IBM in 1991. Lexmark became a publicly traded company in 1995 and became one of Kentucky’s technology poster children. Today Lexmark is more diversified because of a push that began to gain speed in 2010 with its purchase of Perceptive Software. The idea is that Lexmark would become an end to end solutions provider, not a vendor of printers and ink.
The company blipped my radar when it purchased two outfits with search and content processing software. ISYS Search Software had been around since the late 1980s, and Brainware also had some miles on its odometer. Brainware had built a search solution based on its patented n-gram technology. Both brands have mostly disappeared since the Lexmark acquisition.
The company then purchased for $1 billion the one time big dog in document scanning. Between Perceptive and Kofax, Lexmark had a vision of becoming a document processing company. The idea was not a new one in Lexington, which had fostered Exstream Software, purchased by Hewlett Packard in 2008.
I read “Company Shares of Lexmark International, Inc.” and learned:
The Company has disclosed insider buying and selling activities to the Securities Exchange, The officer (Vice President), of Lexmark International Inc /Ky/, Coons Scott T.R. had unloaded 10,000 shares at $38.24 per share in a transaction on July 21, 2015. The total value of transaction was $382,400. The Insider information was revealed by the Securities and Exchange Commission in a Form 4 filing.
The December 10, 2015, Forbes’ article “Weak Demand For Printer Supplies And Hardware Will Continue To Hinder Lexmark’s Printer Business” did little to suggest that the grouser’s comments were wide of the mark.
How has that Lexmark transformation from IBM printer manufacturer to solutions outfit worked out?
If the information shared at the holiday party is accurate, the answer is, “Not so well.” I have no idea if the comments were accurate, muddled by Kentucky’s famous distilled spirits, or the individual’s annoyance that his shares in Lexmark were not putting hay in his horse barn. But the points I noted were:
- The top dog at Lexmark made noises that he wants to leave the company, perhaps as quickly as the new few weeks. The separation terms apparently are rumored to be sufficiently generous to put horses and hay in his stalls.
- The company is for sale and is being shopped in the proper Bluegrass manner. I assume this means with investment bankers who understand the value of digital horse flesh.
- Sales of printers are on hold. The idea is that no one is buying these devices for holiday gifts. The hardware folks at Lexmark are understandably acting like the Grinch stole their Christmas.
- Morale at the company seems to be entering a winter freeze. According to the party talker, grousing is a popular pastime.
The real journalism outfit (Wall Street Journal) reported in October 2015 that Lexmark was “exploring” a sale. So that item in my list of notable party rumors may be accurate. The point about the president, the employee attitude, and the president’s desire to find his future elsewhere may be fluff.
The IBM Lexmark Infoprint EMP156 is perfect for a home office. Don’t forget to order the options: stacker, feeder, and “attention” light.
Lexmark has about $1 billion in debt from its purchase of the document imaging company. The company’s repositioning seems like a good MBA type idea. The problem is that Lexmark has some IBM DNA. The promising Kapow unit is not likely to scale. The enterprise search sector is not likely to scale. The demand for n-gram search is not likely to explode with growth. Here’s the Google finance graph which suggests that revenues and profits are not taking off like SU 35:
My view is that the there will be some disruption for employees (not a good thing in my opinion) and for the city of Lexington (not a good thing for the technology pitch from the Chamber of Commerce).
Worth watching to see if the party chatter is accurate.
Stephen E Arnold, December 14, 2015
Google and Quantum Computing
December 14, 2015
I read “What is the Computational Value of Finite Range Tunneling?” The paper concerns a numerical recipe running on Google spiffy new D-Wave quantum computer. I also read “Google, D-Wave, and the Case of the Factor-10^8 Speedup for WHAT?” This paper points out that Google is making progress with the D-Wave quantum computer. How much progress is a matter for debate among the aficionados of quantum computing. If you are interested in the benchmark, the Google write up and the For What essay are both quite good.
When I worked through these documents, several thoughts crossed my mind, and I jotted down several. Here are two which will not require you, oh, gentle reader, to wade into the murky world of benchmarks and qubits:
1. IBM has a deal, which may be announced by now, to build high performance computer systems for the US government. My hunch is that IBM deserves a pat on its blue suited back for landing a contract to produce something tangible, unlike the Watson marketing hype-o-rama. To my knowledge, Google does not have this sort of deal. Google is writing about another company’s computer, not developing its own super systems. I think this is interesting. In the good old days prior to 2007, the Google was more of a doer. Now Google is a refiner.
2. Googlers have made the D-Wave perform. That’s good. The problem is that like the ORNL wonks using Crays to index health text, the computer is not one available to lots and lots of people. In fact, to verify the Googlers’ achievement, folks with Fancy Dan equipment have to replicate what the Googlers achieved. There will be lots of controversy. The Cray is a user friendly device compared to the D-Wave. Google seems to be working overtime to convince people that it is still a technology leader. I wrote about the gaggle of Googlers talking about Google’s artificial intelligence and machine learning achievements. My question is, “Is the Google feeling the heat from companies doing better in cutting edge technologies?”
Stephen E Arnold, December 14, 2015
Short Honk: Space Time for the Couch Potato Physicist
December 11, 2015
Hey, the weekend is almost here with football and thoughts about the joy of the upcoming holidays with family. For a relaxing read, check out “What Is Spacetime, Really?” For fans of network and graph analysis, Stephen Wolfram shares his most recent big idea. In addition to references to his books, which I assume you, gentle reader, have read, Wolfram explains spacetime. If you are a bit rusty on the notion of space time, Einstein’s theories, and theoretical physicals, don’t worry. The answer is nodes.
Stephen E Arnold, December 11, 2015
Google Executives Have a Look but No Touch Rule
December 11, 2015
Have you ever been to a museum and the curator told you to “look, but don’t touch the exhibits?” The phrase comes into play, because museums want to protect the integrity of the exhibits and to keep them preserved for the ages. One of the draws about these new, modern companies is that all employees are allowed to engage with each other in different departments and the higher-ups are available without a hassle. Or at least that is the image they want to project to the public, especially Google. Business Pundit exposes bow Google CEOs interact with their employees in “Google’ s Top Execs Are Always Visible But Almost Never Approachable” like a museum exhibit.
Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Sundar Pichai make themselves seen at their Mountain View headquarters, but do not even think about going near them. They are walled off to small talk and random interactions because all of their time is booked.
Company developer advocate Don Dodge wrote on a Quora Q&A that Larry Page, Sergey Brin, and Sundar Pichai are in the no approach zone, Dodge explains:
“However, that doesn’t mean they are easy to approach and engage in discussion. They are very private and don’t engage in small talk. They are usually very focused on their priorities, and their schedule is always fully booked. Larry is a notoriously fast walker and avoids eye contact with anyone so he can get to his destination without disruption.”
Get Larry a Segway or one of those new “hoverboard” toys, then he will be able to zoom right past everyone or run them over. Add a little horn to warn people to get out of the way.
Whitney Grace, December 11, 2015
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, publisher of the CyberOSINT monograph
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
