Push Pull Has Lost Out to Collect: The Next Phase of the Internet
December 23, 2014
I am fascinated with the way old insights become the next big thing. Consider “Two Eras of the Internet: Pull and Push.” I am not sure I am comfortable with either of these words. Just as read-write creates an image of how digital information “works,” the notions are difficult to reconcile with what is important about online accessible information.
In the push-pull analogy, the write up focuses on social and flow. The challenge is, “What’s going on now with regards to accessible information?” The answer is, “Collection.” Just as read-write misses the important point about the changes between data that have been written and data that are being written. Wonks refer to this as the “delta.”
My point is that next generation information access is based on these word pairs masquerading as explanations. Based on our research for “CyberOSINT: Next Generation Informaiton Access,” the freshest approach to digital content is automated collection and analysis. How does one make sense of historical, real time, data change, and large volumes of content–predictive analytics that generate useful outputs for humans and for systems.
“CyberOSINT” will be available early in 2015. If you are an active law enforcement, security, and intelligence professional, you can reserve your copy by writing benkent2020 at yahoo dot com. Go beyond simplicity and learn about the information shift changing information access.
Stephen E Arnold, December 23, 2014
How Brands Should Approach Their Analysis of Social Media Mentions
December 23, 2014
The article titled Analyzing Social Media? You’re Doing it Wrong on CMS Wire investigates the tendency of some brands to approach social media without fully understanding context. This means not just scratching the surface, recording the number of mention on a given social media site like Twitter and whether they were positive or negative, but finding out what the conversation about your brand is really like. The article explains,
“Understanding important attributes within conversations, such as perceptions of cost or pricing, levels of customer satisfaction… and opinions of quality, actually help brands understand how they are positioned in the minds of consumers. Many of the more advanced social intelligence platforms operate on a flexible query language, some allow users to create custom filters…Customizable filters and theme detection are of course the easiest, however, with some ingenuity, queries can also be adapted to uncovering deeper context”
This sort of information can then allow for the brand to react in a way that is actually more fully formed and based off of a more accurate perception. While some people are doing this incorrectly, others in the Next Generation Information Access game are not. This might be the more important point for people active on social media to consider about who is listening.
Chelsea Kerwin, December 23, 2014
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Centrifuge Analytics v3 Promises Better Understanding of Big Data Through Visualization
December 23, 2014
The article on WMC Action News 5 titled Centrifuge Analytics v3 is Now Available- Large Scale Data Discovery Never Looked Better promotes the availability of Centrifuge Analytics v3, a product that enables users to see the results of their data analysis like never before. This intuitive, efficient tool helps users dig deeper into the meaning of their data. Centrifuge Systems has gained a reputation in data discovery software, particularly in the fields of cyber security, counter-terrorism, homeland defense, and financial crimes analysis among others. Chief Executive Officer Simita Bose is quoted in the article,
“Centrifuge exists to help customers with critical missions, from detecting cyber threats to uncovering healthcare fraud…Centrifuge Analytics v3 is an incredibly innovative product that represents a breakthrough for big data discovery.” “Big data is here to stay and is quickly becoming the raw material of business,” says Stan Dushko, Chief Product Officer at Centrifuge Systems. “Centrifuge Analytics v3 allows users to answer the root cause and effect questions to help them take the right actions.”
The article also lists several of the perks of Centrifuge Analytics v3, including that it is easy to deploy in multiple settings from a laptop to the cloud. It also offers powerful visuals in a fully integrated background that is easy for users to explore, and even add to if source data is complete. This may be an answer for companies who have all the big data they need, but don’t know what it means.
Chelsea Kerwin, December 23, 2014
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
Customers Dissatisfied with SharePoint Online Cuts
December 23, 2014
Certain SharePoint Online features are being phased out. Rumor has it that Public Sites may be the next to go. But in a world where knowing, preparing, and bracing for change is really valuable, Microsoft isn’t talking. ZDNet covers the breaking story in their article, “Microsoft Users Not Happy Over Quiet SharePoint Online Feature Cuts.”
The article begins:
“Microsoft announced the company would enable its business customers to stay on top of the rollout of the myriad moving parts of Microsoft’s Office 365 service. The Office 365 Roadmap site would become a central site for many (but not all) Office 365 features that were announced, rolling out or being nixed before they debuted, officials said. But in the past couple of months, Microsoft has been eliminating quietly some SharePoint Online features — with more possible eliminations to come. Finding out about those planned cuts isn’t as easy as it should be, customers say.”
Stephen E. Arnold has been covering search, including enterprise, for the span of his career. He reports his findings on ArnoldIT.com. This SharePoint online rumor is a good example of a time in which it’s important to have outside sources. Arnold reports the latest SharePoint news, rumor, tips, and tricks on his SharePoint feed, and users may find it most helpful when attempting to brace for the impact of changes such as those mentioned above.
Emily Rae Aldridge, December 23, 2014
LucidWorks (Really?) Wants to Kill Splunk (Really?)
December 22, 2014
Let’s hear it for originality. LucidWorks (really?) is not content to watch Elasticsearch’s lead in the open source enterprise search sector. LucidWorks (really?) seeks to distinguish itself in committing metaphorical murder of Splunk, one of the go-to log file centric solutions. What makes life more interesting is that the murder, which seems quite improbably, is patricide. The president of LucidWorks (really?) is a former Splunk employee.
Now that’s the stuff of Greek tragedy recast as Silicon Valley silliness. Navigate to “Lucid Woks Preps Solr Stack as Splunk Killer.” Note that LucidWorks (really?) is not yet a Splunk or anything else Richard Speck. If Recorded Future-type systems were to process this statement, I am not sure it would warrant more than a two percent probability. But here’s the plan:
SiLK “is a solution that relies on open core components that organizations can use to manage log data at scale,” said Will Hayes, LucidWorks chief product officer.The SiLK package combines Apache Lucene/Solr with a number of open-source analysis tools, namely Apache Flume, LogStash and Kibana.
LucidWorks will play catch up to Elasticsearch’s open source offering. Why catch up when you can try semantically questionable marketing ploys?
I think the dearth of marketing creativity is illustrative of the absence of fresh ideas at LucidWorks (really?). One thing is certain: use of the term “murder” will mark LucidWorks (really?) in an interesting way.
Hitting revenue targets, retaining staff, and innovating would be my preferred approach to this open source enterprise search company’s future. But if murder is the company’s game, “Book ’em, Dan O. Marketing silliness.”
Stephen E Arnold, December 22, 2014
xx
Coveoed Up with End of Week Marketing
December 22, 2014
I am the target of inbound marketing bombardments. I used to look forward to Autonomy’s conceptual inducements. In fact, in my opinion, the all-time champ in enterprise search marketing is Autonomy. HP now owns the company, and the marketing has fizzled in my opinion. I am in some far off place, and I sifted through emails, various alerts, and information dumped in my Overflight system.
I must howl, “Uncle.” I have been covered up or Coveo-ed up.
Coveo is the Canadian enterprise search company that began life as a hard drive search program and then morphed into a Microsoft-centric solution. With some timely venture funding, the company has amped up its marketing. The investor have flown to Australia to lecture about search. Australia as you may know is the breeding ground for the TeraText system which is a darned important enterprise application. Out of the Australia research petri dish emerged Funnelback. There was YourAmigo, and some innovations that keep the lights on in the Google offices in the land down under.
Coveo sent me email asking if my Google search appliance was delivering. Well, the GSA does exactly what it was designed to do in the early 2000s. I am not sure I want it to do anything anymore. Here’s part of the Coveo message to me:
Hi,
Is your Search Appliance failing you? Is it giving you irrelevant search results, or unable to search all of your systems? It’s time you considered upgrading to the only enterprise search platform that:
- Securely indexes all of your on-premise and cloud-based source systems
- Provides easy-to-tune relevance and actionable analytics
- Delivers unified search to any application and device your teams use
If I read this correctly, I don’t need a GSA, an Index Engines, a Maxxcat, or an EPI Thunderstone. I can just pop Coveo into my shop and search my heart out.
How do I know?
Easy. The mid tier consulting firm Gartner has identified Coveo as “the most visionary leader” in enterprise search. I am not sure about the methods of non-blue chip consulting firms. I assume they are objective and on a par with the work of McKinsey, Bain, Booz, Allen, and Boston Consulting Group. I have heard that some mid tier firms take a slightly different approach to their analyses. I know first hand that one mid tier firm recycled my research and sold my work on Amazon without my permission. I don’t recall that happening when I worked at Booz, Allen, though. We paid third parties, entered into signed agreements, and were upfront about who knew what. Times change, of course.
Another message this weekend told me that Coveo had identified five major trends that—wait for it—“increase employee and customer proficiency in 2015.” I don’t mean to be more stupid than the others residing in my hollow in rural Kentucky, but what the heck is “customer proficiency”? What body of evidence supports these fascinating “trends.”
The trends are remarkable for me. I just completed CyberOSINT: Next Generation Information Access. The monograph will be available in early 2015 to active law enforcement, security, and intelligence professionals. If you qualify and want to get a copy, send an email to benkent2020 at yahoo dot com. I was curious to see if the outlook my research team assembled from our 12 months of research into the future of information access matched to Coveo’s trends.
The short answer is, “Not even close.”
Coveo focuses on “the ecosystem of record.” CyberOSINT focuses on automated collection and analytics. An “ecosystem of record” sounds like records management. In 2015 organizations need intelligence automatically discovered in third party, proprietary, and open source content, both historical and real time.
Coveo identifies “upskilling the end users.” In our work, the focus is on delivering to either a human or another system outputs that permit informed action. In many organizations, end users are being replaced by increasingly intelligent systems. That trend seems significant in the software delivered by the NGIA vendors whose technology we analyzed. (NGIA is shorthand for next generation information access.)
Coveo is concerned about a “competent customer.” That’s okay, but isn’t that about cost reduction. The idea is to get rid of expensive call center humans and replace them with NGIA systems. Our research suggests that automated systems are the future, or did I just point that out in the “upskilling” comment.
Coveo is mobile first. No disagreement there. The only hitch in the git along is that when one embraces mobile, there are some significant interface issues and predictive operations become more important. Therefore, in the NGIA arena, predictive outputs are where the trend runway lights are leading.
Coveo is confident that cloud indexes and their security will be solved. That is reassuring. However, the cloud as well as on premises’ solutions, including hybrid solutions, have to adopt predictive technology that automatically deals with certain threats, malware, violations, and internal staff propensities. The trend, therefore, is for OSINT centric systems that hook into operational and intel related functions as well as performing external scans from perimeter security devices.
What I find fascinating is that in the absence of effective marketing from vendors of traditional keyword search, providers of old school information access are embracing some concepts and themes that are orthogonal to a very significant trend in information access.
Coveo is obviously trying hard, experimenting with mid tier consulting firm endorsements, hitting the rubber chicken circuit, and cranking out truly stunning metaphors like the “customer proficiency” assertion.
The challenge for traditional keyword search firms is that NGIA systems have relegated traditional information access approaches to utility and commodity status. If one wants search, Elasticsearch works pretty well. NGIA systems deliver a different class of information access. NGIA vendors’ solutions are not perfect, but they are a welcome advance over the now four decades old approach to finding important items of information without the Model T approach of scanning a results list, opening and browsing possibly relevant documents, and then hunting for the item of information needed to answer an important question.
The trend, therefore, is NGIA. An it is an important shift to solutions whose cost can be measured. I wish Mike Lynch was driving the Autonomy marketing team again. I miss the “Black Hole of Information”, the “Portal in a Box,” and the Digital Reasoning Engine approach. Regardless of what one thinks about Autonomy, the company was a prescient marketer. If the Lynch infused Autonomy were around today, the moniker “NGIA” would be one that might capture of Autonomy’s marketing love.
Stephen E Arnold, December 23, 2014
xx
Beyond Search Content Flow
December 22, 2014
To my two or three readers:
We will be reducing the flow of stories from December 18, 2014, to January 1, 2015. Coverage in Beyond Search will be expanded to include the new Cyber OSINT data stream and including content about NGIA (next generation information access). I will be moving the IDC/Schubmehl content to the Xenky.com Web site to make on going references to the reputation surfing easier to reference.
Enjoy the holidays.
Stephen E Arnold, December 22, 2014
Elsevier and Bad Information
December 22, 2014
Years and years ago, a unit of the Courier Journal & Louisville Times created the Business Dateline database. As far as I know, it was the first full text online database to feature corrections. The team believed that most online content contained flaws, and neither the database producers, the publishers, nor the online distributions like LexisNexis invested much effort in accuracy. How many databases followed in our footsteps? Well, not too many. At one time it was exactly zero. But people perceive information from a computer as accurate, based on studies we did at the newspaper and subsequently as part of ArnoldIT’s work.
Flash forward to our go go now. The worm, after several decades, may be turning, albeit slowly. Navigate to “Elsevier Retracting 16 Papers for Faked Peer Review.” Assuming the write up was itself accurate, I noted this passage:
We consider ourselves to have an important role in prevention. We try to put a positive tone to our education material, so it’s not a draconian “we will catch you” – it’s also about the importance of research integrity for science, the perception of science with taxpayers…there are a lot of rewards for doing this the right way.
The questions in my mind are:
- How many errors are in the LexisNexis online file? What steps are being taken to remove the ones known to be incorrect; for example, technical papers with flawed information?
- How will Elsevier alert its customers that some information may be inaccurate?
- What process is in place for other Elsevier properties to correct, minimize, and eliminate errors in print and online content?
I can imagine myself in a meeting with Elsevier’s senior management. My task is to propose specific measures to ensure quality, accuracy, and timeliness in Elsevier’s products. I am not sure my suggestions will be ones that generate a great deal of enthusiasm. Hopefully, I am incorrect.
Stephen E Arnold, December 22, 2014
Data Analysis by Algorithm
December 22, 2014
The folks at Google may have the answer for the dearth of skilled data analysts out there. Unfortunately for our continuing job crisis, that answer does not lie in (human) training programs. Google Research Blog discusses “Automatically Making Sense of Data.” Writers Keven Murphy and David Harper ask:
“What if one could automatically discover human-interpretable trends in data in an unsupervised way, and then summarize these trends in textual and/or visual form? To help make progress in this area, Professor Zoubin Ghahramani and his group at the University of Cambridge received a Google Focused Research Award in support of The Automatic Statistician project, which aims to build an ‘artificial intelligence for data science’.”
Trends in time-series data have thus far provided much fodder for the team’s research. The article details an example involving solar-irradiance levels over time, and discusses modeling the data using Gaussian-based statistical models. Murphy and Harper report on the Cambridge team’s progress:
“Prof Ghahramani’s group has developed an algorithm that can automatically discover a good kernel, by searching through an open-ended space of sums and products of kernels as well as other compositional operations. After model selection and fitting, the Automatic Statistician translates each kernel into a text description describing the main trends in the data in an easy-to-understand form.”
Naturally, the team is going on to work with other kinds of data. We wonder—have they tried it on Google Glass market projections?
There’s a simplified version available for demo at the project’s website, and an expanded version should be available early next year. See the write-up for the technical details.
Cynthia Murrell, December 22, 2014
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
On Commercial vs Open Source Databases
December 22, 2014
Perhaps we should not be surprised that MarkLogic’s Chet Hays urges caution before adopting an open-source data platform. His article, “Thoughts on How to Select Between COTS and Open Source” at Sys-Con Media can be interpreted as a defense of his database company’s proprietary approach. (For those unfamiliar with the acronym, COTS stands for commodity off-the-shelf.) Hayes urges buyers to look past initial cost and consider other factors in three areas: technical, cultural, and, yes, financial.
In the “technical” column, Hayes asserts that whether a certain solution will meet an organization’s needs is more complex than a simple side-by-side comparison of features would suggest; we are advised to check the fine print. “Cultural” refers here to taking workers’ skill sets into consideration. Companies usually do this with their developers, Hayes explains, but often overlook the needs of the folks in operational support, who might appreciate the more sophisticated tools built into a commercial product. (No mention is made of the middle ground, where we find third-party products designed that add such tools to Hadoop iterations.)
In his comments on financial impact, Hayes basically declares: It’s complicated. He writes:
“Organizations need to look at the financial picture from a total-cost perspective, looking at the acquisition and development costs all the way through the operations, maintenance and eventual retirement of the system. In terms of development, the organization should understand the costs associated with using a COTS provided tool vs. an Open Source tool.
“[…] In some cases, the COTS tool will provide a significant productivity increase and allow for a quicker time to market. There will be situations where the COTS tool is so cumbersome to install and maintain that an Open Source tool would be the right choice.
“The other area already alluded to is the cost for operations and maintenance over the lifecycle of project. Organizations should take into consideration existing IT investments to understand where previous investments can be leveraged and the cost incurred to leverage these systems. Organizations should ask whether the performance of one or the other allow for a reduced hardware and deployment footprint, which would lead to lower costs.”
These are all good points, and organizations should indeed do this research before choosing a solution. Whether the results point to an open-source solution or to a commercial option depends entirely upon the company or institution.
Cynthia Murrell, December 22, 2014
Sponsored by ArnoldIT.com, developer of Augmentext
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
