Google and Its Security Woes
January 18, 2010
There are some practical issues that must be addressed when dealing with security. First, the people working on the security problem have to be vetted. This requires time and organization. Organizations in a hurry and not well organized are at greater risk than a plodding, more methodical outfit. Although troubling to some, the security people have to be subject to some type of monitoring as well. The idea is that layers of security methods and procedures are required. Again, this takes expertise and experience. Short cuts can increase risk.
Then when something bad happens, it is a good idea to look for indications that someone close to the matter is involved, intentionally or unintentionally. Some countries use clever methods to socially engineer an opportunity to exploit a weakness in security. I know that the idea of a team implies that everyone is going to run the game plan. Alas, that’s not always accurate.
In my experience, keeping an issue contained is a prudent first step. The idea that quick reaction or chatter helps may be an inaccurate one. Some outputs are necessary, but crazy talk is rarely helpful whether from pundits, poobahs, satraps, or azure chip consultants.
I was surprised to read several widely circulated news stories that provide some additional “information” or “disinformation” about the Google security matter. The work “attack” is attached to this issue, but I don’t know enough to be able to say whether this was an “attack” or one of those cute things that math club members perpetrate as a way to get attention, change grades for the football team, or transfer cafeteria money to a charity like Midnight Auto Supply.
The Great Wall of China was built for a reason. Some of those reasons exist for today’s Chinese governmental entities. Those who build the Great Wall were not concerned with the environmental or financial impact of the Great Wall. Priorities may be different in China than in other geographic areas or nation states. Image source: http://www.globusjourneys.com/Common/Images/Destinations/great-wall.jpg
That’s the problem with lots of information or lots of disinformation. There is uncertainty, what I call a “cloud of unknowing”.
Here’s what’s caught my attention. (Keep in mind that I have no solid opinion on this matter because I only know what flops into my newsreader and that information or disinformation is suspect by definition.)
Google and the Real Estate Squish
January 18, 2010
When I was putting the finishing touches on Google: The Digital Gutenberg, I did some testing of the “old” Google Base. That service, before it underwent a major overhaul, included job listings and real estate listing. You may have stumbled upon real estate information when you were searching Google Local. I found that for certain areas, the system would provide pictures of houses for sale and in some cases backlinks to more detailed listings. If you navigate to Google Local and run the query “condominium Baltimore Maryland” you could (at 9 24 am, January 17, 2009, see this result set:
I have written extensively about various Google technologies that make this type of service possible. These include the programmable search engine invention and the work of the dataspace team, among others.
I read in “Google to Scoop Up Real Estate Sites” that some talk about Google purchasing real estate services. My research indicates that acquisitions are an easy way for Google to acquire expertise. The potential of Google’s providing a meta service to organize and make coherent the patchwork of services related to real property has been on the Google radar for years. My recollection is that Google patent documents from the early 2000s reference these types of applications.
When thinking about real estate, it may be helpful to keep in mind the range of services that a real estate transaction requires. My hunch is that real estate is one exemplary application of Google’s approach to online services.
To sum up, if the publishing and telco sector thought that Google was disruptive, wait until the real estate food chain figures out what’s about to happen. Once again: when you see overt instances of a Google application, it is too late. This is the gap problem that befuddles a number of companies affected by the Google’s expanding technical domain. Visualize a hard copy publication containing houses for sale and rent. Visualize a Google real estate service on a mobile device. Yikes, bad news for the directory crowd do you think?
Stephen E Arnold, January 18, 2010
Ah, gentle reader, no one paid me to put this shameless plug for my Google monographs in this blog. I will report this to the US Department of Housing & Urban Development.
A Possible Trajectory for Open Source Search
January 18, 2010
I read “How Hadoop Startup Cloudera Is Evolving” in the Industry Standard. Let me define a couple of terms to help me get my point across. Hadoop is an open source version of next generation technology for data intensive distributed applications. Hadoop has some hooks into some Google technology for data management wizardry. You can get some additional information in “Map Reduce Programming with Apache Hadoop”. A Cloudera employee (Doug Cutting) is pegged as the person who created Hadoop. With Hadoop as a top level Apache project, variants have emerged. Yahoo, for example, has its own Hadoop distribution. (No, I don’t know why. That’s what makes Yahoo Yahoo I suppose.) Hadoop is a big deal and both Google and IBM want to build Hadoop awareness among budding data wizards.
Now back to the Industry Standard article. For me the key point was that “Cloudera
has also quietly released a proprietary data integration app. It “doesn’t replace an Informatica or Ab Initio,” says Cloudera CEO Mike Olson, but it does provide extract and transform features. The data integration app will be formally released this quarter as part of the overarching Cloudera Dta Platform. No price has been determined yet, said Olson.
The trajectory strikes me that open source provides a technical and marketing angle. The revenue generating part of the approach is proprietary technology and services. Cloudera’s investors rightly want their money back and a payoff from their $11.0 million in funding to Cloudera. Open source is shifting from “open” to a more highly spiced approach.
Now what’s this have to do with open source search? In my view, the Cloudera approach is another example of using open source as a marketing hook that dangles lower cost, community support, and higher performance in front of very hungry chief financial officers. The Cloudera approach makes clear that the on premises console hooks into the Cloudera cloud service creating a very practical approach to issues of control and on premises security methods.
Will this highly spiced approach reduces the total cost of ownership of an open source search solution? The answer is a “maybe”. Here’s why:
- License fees are not an issue at the outset; additional software, if required, may require license fees
- Maintenance can be zero if you have the expertise to manage the system. If you don’t, you will have to pay for maintenance service
- Customization can be a do-it-yourself job. If you cannot do it yourself, you will need to pay for that service
- Integration can be embedded in other costs, but if extensive customization is required, that cost will surface.
In short, the open source angle is more of a marketing play than a significant difference from commercial software. When a proprietary software vendor jumps into the open source game, there is a marketing and revenue reason that overshadows the “do good” reasons.
Life is good with open source solutions if you are knowledgeable. If you aren’t, I am not confident that the total costs will be significant when I look out across staff turnover, the need for special functions, and a change driven by a change elsewhere in the organization’s technical infrastructure.
The Cloudera trajectory strikes me as one to monitor. Will the mission control folks say “Mission accomplished” or “Houston, we have a problem”?
Stephen E Arnold, January 18, 2010
No one paid me to write this opinion. Do I report this to the FCC, an outfit that seeks opinions?
The Utility of Google Wave
January 18, 2010
Short honk: I have been describing Wave in my Google lectures for a while. I want to recommend “20 Real World Uses for Google Wave”. MacLife has gathered a number of interesting examples and screen shots. If you have been unsure of how to use Wave, this article is the one to read. Excellent.
Stephen E Arnold, January 18, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I think the publication originates in another country. I will report on my return to the IRA the poverty stricken state in which I existed when I praised this article.
Google and Face Recognition
January 18, 2010
You can read a good summary of a mainstream publication’s analysis of Google and its face recognition technology. Just navigate to Google Blogoscoped and check out “German Spiegel on Google Goggles’ Face Recognition and More”. The only problem is that the author of the write up did not consider the application of this system and method to video. To get the full picture of the Google facial recognition capability, you may want to skip the traditional publication and read US20100008547 “Method and System for Automated Annotation of Persons in Video Content”. You can find this document at the USPTO’s free patent document Web site, www.uspto.com. I find it interesting that open source information about a specific and significant Google system and method is ignored. Much easier to write without too much information I suppose. That’s what keeps the Larry and Sergey eat pizza book writers in high clover.
Stephen E Arnold, January 18, 2010
A freebie. Due to the direct reference to the USPTO, I herewith report that I was not paid to point out this omission about Google’s facial recognition technology.
Amazon and Traditional Publishers Anger Some eBook Buyers
January 17, 2010
Let me point out that the hype about eBook readers is entertaining. But the existence of eBook readers will not create overnight more people who buy and read lots of books. I use an eBook reader because I don’t have to carry a bunch of books on a long international flight. I read most of the way, so eBook readers allow me to carry one printed book (usually a small one about math) and a Kindle jammed with many different things. The book stores used to love me. Now I don’t bother. I order traditional books online and steer clear of the gift card and book light shops that book stores have become.
The article “Kindle Fans Punish Publisher For Delaying Ebook Releases By Giving Books One-Star Reviews” points out one of those delicious unexpected consequences type anecdotes. Publishers want to put out a new book like I, Sniper in hard copy and then later release an eBook version. This is one of those great ideas the folks who don’t understand the excitement that online often triggers. Annoyed book buyers have been giving books lousy reviews on Amazon.
To me the most interesting comment in the article was:
HarperCollins — one of the leading supporters of these silly “windowed” releases — is discovering that its well-hyped book Game Change is filling up with one-star reviews. Going against what your consumers want is almost never a good idea.
Too bad I will be in Europe Monday. I will have to check and see what the traditional publishers and that fine outfit Amazon will do to get book buyers to lay on their side and pant. Is this a job for the Dog Whisperer? Probably.
Stephen E Arnold, January 17, 2010
A freebie. Because this is about publishing, I must report non payment to the GPO.
SharePoint Sunday: A Calm Week
January 17, 2010
First, SharePoint excitement did not ruffle the feathers of the Beyond Search team this week. There were a few questions about my reference to the SharePoint Fast search tweaking white paper. These were mostly about the complexity of the settings and the possible interdependency. My response was, “You think Microsoft is going to recode Fast Search ESP?” The people with whom I spoke expressed surprise that a system built for Linux would not be rebuilt from the ground up for the SharePoint world. Not even Microsoft’s code wizards can perform this type of task in the time between April 2008 and today. If you missed the white paper, here’s a download link. You will need the Microsoft file viewer to see this document once you have downloaded the file, Optimize search relevance with Microsoft FAST Search Server 2010 for SharePoint (Beta).
Second, we honked with glee when we learned that PMG.Net Inc. published a Service Catalog Suite. This product is compatible with MOSS. The catalog is:
most easy-to-use, easy-to-configure, and easy-to-deploy service catalog and portfolio management solution on the market today. PMG has been a pioneer with deep experience in e-Commerce, portal, and collaboration for almost 15 years. PMG SCS is the culmination and powerful combination of three of our flagship products:
PMG iRequest ~ e-Commerce online catalog and request system with over 500 built-in templates
PMG iDeliver ~ Business Process Management Suite (BPMS) providing powerful workflow design, integration, and automation capabilities
PMG iCollaborate ~ for exceptionally easy content management and collaboration.
You can find more information on the PMG Web site. Worth a look in our opinion.
Finally, we found “How to Use SharePoint Metadata to Improve Search and Control Content – Part 3: Classifying SharePoint Content to Improve Search and Control Content” interesting. We hear a lot about metadata and how it is the greatest thing since sliced bread was invented in the library in Ephesus several centuries ago. Yep, metadata is a big, new thing for some folks. This write up walks through the metadata components and concludes with this statement:
The need for a standardized content search and workflow dictate that metadata structures should be standardized and consistent across SharePoint environment in an organization. Different evolutionary approaches can be taken to design and maintain these structures. Coupled with multiple mechanisms for entering and updating metadata values for your SharePoint content will result in an effective, consistent and reliable search experience and an efficient automation of business processes through workflows.
We agree. Organizations may find it helpful to seek the support of a trained information professional with experience in the development of controlled term lists. The key idea is that lousy metadata almost guarantees lousy search results. Good metadata, on the other hand, can make even less than spectacular content processing systems work better.
Stephen E Arnold, January 17, 2010
A freebie. No one paid me to write about SharePoint, not even the Department of Defense which has quite a few SharePoint fans.
Quote to Note: Google on Secrets
January 17, 2010
I scanned the Newsweek interview with Eric Schmidt, one of the triumvirate running the Google. I noted this quote and I wanted to capture it:
We are going to the Chinese government, and we hope we can work things out. But we want to be transparent. We don’t want to keep secrets.
I like the “We don’t want to keep secrets” phrase. I wonder what happened to some general information I once saw on the Web about some of the Googlers listed as inventors on certain Google patents. My search skills must be subpar.
Stephen E Arnold, January 17, 2010
I was not paid to write this quote to note article. I don’t know to whom to report this sad state of affairs. Maybe someone in the OEB?
SAP Does an About Face on Some Fees
January 16, 2010
I think SAP provides the same type of information a long range scout does. The scout goes out, checks out the territory, and then comes back and reports. The scout’s bosses listen to what the scout says and then decides what to do. The whole set up of an organization mode with scouts and bosses “in the rear with the gear” is fascinating to me. Vendors of complex, time consuming, resource intensive old fashioned software are trying to change. With revenue slipping and the economic crisis lingering, SAP provides useful information. Read “Price Hike Ditched as SAP’s Enterprise Support Makes a Comeback” and you can catch a glimpse of what other enterprise software vendors may be pondering; namely, a price cut and cooing to make peace with customers. Losing a customer is an expensive proposition because it is a one two hit. The company loses the revenue and then has to spend dough to find more customers to take up the slack. In my opinion, the most interesting comment in the write up was:
This move shows that SAP is listening to user groups, and therefore its customers, taking on board our feedback and making changes to meet the needs of all SAP users,” he said in a statement.
My thought is that this is a placeholder move. SAP will be under more price pressure, not less. Once the company blinks, the customers know that SAP must cave. Lower prices mean bad news for enterprise software vendors and resellers. Lower prices may force cloud alternatives to lower their rates. In short, am I seeing a phase change in enterprise software? Yep.
Stephen E Arnold, January 16, 2010
No one paid me to write this. I may fly over the SAP headquarters next week, but I don’t think I will visit. Do I report this to the FAA or to the DOT?
Paywalls and the Unthinkable
January 16, 2010
If you like surveys, you may find “Pay Walls Will Fail: Nobody Wants to Pay for Online Newspapers” interesting. If you work at a newspaper planning on making big bucks from for fee electronic editions, you may want to skip this blog post. The survey presents data that alleges lots of people will not pay for newspaper content offered on a for fee basis via the Web. Big surprise? Nope. Not many publications have sufficient content to pull enough online revenue to pay the bills. There were a couple of points in the write up of the survey data that I found notable.
First 10 percent of those in the sample of 2,000 people don’t read a newspaper. Yowza. I think that percentage will grow as oldster like me head to the big computer store in the sky. Second, a surprising 23 percent are willing to pay. That percentage struck me as high. In my experience, the pull of electronic content is a fraction of the audience for a traditional printed publication. The reason is that those who like paper and ink are not too keen on the online or electronic experience.
The unthinkable for newspapers and magazines spending big money on electronic publishing systems is that paywalls won’t work. So what’s plan B?
Stephen E Arnold, January 15, 2010
A freebie. I will report this to the Coast Guard. You know that is the outfit partially on call when ships and other constructs sink.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
