Convergence of Ideas and the Internet Singularity

Recently I noticed a strange convergence of ideas show up through my Blogroll, so I wanted to call out a few posts.
 
Scott Adams, of Dilbert fame, writes that if he could fix one problem in the world, he would give everyone the ability to understand when someone had more expertise than us on a given subject.  In another post he writes about making complicated decisions where many of the influencing factors are effectively unknown.
 
Malcom Gladwell (The author of Blink) writes about expert systems and how sometimes algorithms can be used to increase the probability that the average decision maker will make good choices.
 
Thirdly, and this is a bit older, Gary Flake often talks (and writes, and presents) about the idea of an Internet singularity, where humanity achieves a sort of critical mass that enables rapid forward progress.  

All of these ideas seemed to mesh together in my mind.  Scott Adams' "Universal Fix" is the event horizon to the internet singularity.  People already have access to more information than they need.  The big problem is that they have way too much information.  They don't know who to trust.  Was that Amazon review written by a paid shill, or is this product really the best?  Gladwell's post shows how we will likely get there from here.   What we need are expert systems that are designed to sift the BS from the good information.  When I need advice on how to clean a juice stain on my carpet, or get an eyelash out of my eye I need to know that I can go to a single location and find what I need.
 
The good thing is that they have been working on the BS filter for a while now.  Google has a pretty good one built.  Microsoft is getting close to feature & relevance parity with Google.  Other players are keeping pace. 
 
The winner is going to be the company that manages to build a brand that is no longer associated with searching the internet, but rather with finding knowledge and information all over the world.  It's a subtle distinction considering how much of the world's knowledge is making it's way onto the internet.  The problem is that internet search is all about research, and research isn't always fun.  While I enjoy reading specs while considering buying a new computer, most folks would rather just be able to provide information about how they plan to use the machine and get good solid recommendations back. I know Dell and Gateway and others say "Just call us, we'll tell you what you need", but that is advertising, not good advice.
 
Most people go to the search engines because they have a problem to solve.  The research that entails is a means to an end, not the end itself.  Instead of spewing out pages and pages of indexed text, I need a search engine that gives me concise, correct opinions, or which points me to experts, and/or expert systems that can solve my problems better than I can.  And I need to be able to trust that no one is paying for the privilege of getting to be my "expert" so they can make a profit off me.

Friday, December 01, 2006 9:02:39 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Random | Search

MSN Direct for the Masses

Ok, I'm not going to claim to have researched the feasibility of this, but I've been eyeing various models of the MSN Direct (SPOT) watches for years now, but every year I check the coverage maps, and every year I am disappointed that coverage hasn't yet expanded anywhere near my location.  I was wondering if it would be possible for Microsoft to design and build a personal USB connected Low-Power Unlicensed FM transmitter that could provide sync and data to these watches.  

My understanding is that these watches already get all of their data over FM radio data channels, so it would probably only require minor changes if any to make it work with a "MSN Direct Base Station".  Most of us spend the majority of our days near one or two internet connected computers, so this solution would keep the watch almost as up to date as if we were in a real coverage area.  And since the personal base station would only be syncing our data, it might even provide faster updates of the information we care about.

Friday, December 01, 2006 4:11:26 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Mobiles | MSN

So Television Really Was a Fad

TechCrunch's Arrington writes that Television is dead.  From that post: "The key tipping point will be when a startup is able to distribute proper television content over the Internet legally. People will begin to abandon their cable tv subscriptions in favor of Internet distribution." 

The only argument I have with this statement is that there doesn't have to be a startup.  Last year I wrote a post titled "A New Media Model" where I discussed how the media producers could simply cut out the middle men and deliver content directly to consumers.  I really don't want a new middle man to take the place of the old one, I want flatter distribution, and I want choices about what content I receive, when I receive it, and how I can use it. 
 
As a side note, until devices like Apple's ITV are commonplace, efforts in this arena are going to fall flat.  I've watched missed episodes of some of our favorite shows on our computer and it just isn't the same.

Friday, December 01, 2006 3:50:43 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [1]  Media

When Blogs Go Dark

I don't know how many "Sorry I haven't posted in a while" apology posts I have read in the years I have been following blogs, but they always seem a little out of place.  With very few exceptions, blogs generally don't imply any sort of commitment on the volume of content, and honestly for most folks I would really rather they didn't post if they don't have anything interesting to say.

This highlights another interesting benefit of the RSS syndication model.  A non-updated feed does not take away from my attention.  It doesn't waste my time the way that visiting a stale website would.

So to all the dark bloggers out there, release yourselves from the guilt of not posting.  It doesn't matter to me or my feed reader that you haven't posted in a month.  Your subscribers will still be here ready to read your next post, and very few will drop your feed from their blogrolls.  I would argue that you are more likely to lose subscribers from repeated apology posts, or uninteresting filler posts.

So, when family commitments get in the way, or when work hits crunch time, or when you just don't have anything interesting to say, just lay low. The blogosphere will be waiting when you have the time, energy and inspiration.

Wednesday, November 01, 2006 7:55:28 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Blogging

Looking forward to a Zune Desktop

I'm not sure if this is the direction they are going, but I am starting to wonder exactly how open ended the Zune brand is going to be.  We have already seen that Microsoft is keeping Zune pretty well isolated from the Windows brand, and even from the Microsoft brand.

I wonder if Microsoft might be manufacturing a schism between their business productivity OS (Windows), and their ideal of being the personal media hub in people's homes and in people's hands. Keeping up with the business aspects of Windows has somewhat hobbled Microsoft's media hub efforts.  By trying to be all things to all people, there are certain market segments that Microsoft is losing its grasp on. 

If Zune takes off, I wouldn't be surprised to see a Zune Desktop/Media Center (hopefully with a better name than 'Media Center'), and maybe even a Zune Home Media Server. By cannibalizing the home user market share that Windows currently holds, Microsoft would be in a better position to defend against Apple, Linux, and others... It would  be much better for Microsoft to lose this marketshare to itself rather than to a competitor.

What would this allow?  I could have a Zune Umpc/Origami device, Zune Media Center, and Zune Handheld/Phone, all syncing my personal information and media seamlessly and giving me a rich experience free from all the overhead of a general purpose business PC.  The Zune platform would focus on: web, email, video, audio, blogging, podcasting, video, and social networking. This would also allow each OS to be tailored to specific usage scenarios that are wildly different, giving business users more of what they need in Windows, and giving consumers more of what they want under the Zune brand.

Didn't they do this before?  Microsoft used to have two codebases.  With Windows XP, they ditched the older DOS/Win95/98/ME codebase, and brought the consumer OS's in line with the NT codebase.  This brought a a lot of efficiencies since the Windows team no longer had to worry about maintaining two very different codebases, but it also saddled the Consumer OS with all of the burdens of the Business OS, including strict backwards compatibility, corporate manageability, and a seemingly infinite hardware ecosystem.   Just like the X-box borrowed from the Windows codebase, the Zune brand extensions could do the same (Hmmm.  Aren't the X-Box folks behind this whole Zune thing?) 

Making use of existing mature code where appropriate, and leaving behind the things that don't make sense could bring an awesome experience to consumers.  Basically Microsoft would be taking advantage of all of their intellectual property, and all of the lessons they learned building NT for businesses and building X-Box for gamers, and they would be applying that to solving the consumer scenario.

Thursday, October 05, 2006 4:47:07 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [2]  Microsoft

Why isn't it Soapbox.live.com?

More brand confusion is on-tap from the MSN/Live.com folks.  They are slowly opening up the beta of their Soapbox.msn.com video site.  Now many folks are going to be confused as to why this isn't Soapbox.live.com.  It's for user-generated content right?  That's kinda like spaces.live.com.  It's for sharing with your friends & family.  And strangely, the beta invitation signup appears to be handled through ideas.live.com.
 
Back when the whole live.com branding thing was new, there was a lot of discussion about what it all really meant.  Sanaz Ahari posted some clarifications, and then later a bit of a mea culpa on behalf of Microsoft. 
 
The original explanation points to the reasoning for why Soapbox is an MSN site.  MSN is about supposedly about content, and Live.com is about services.  Unfortunately, there are many problems with trying to make this distinction.  Blogging is all about content.  95% of the value of a service like spaces.live.com is the content!  Gallery.live.com? Content as well.   Yes there is a services aspect to spaces, gallery and soapbox, but after seeing the flury of live.com announcements, I was totally expecting Warhol to come out under the live.com banner.  Maybe you at least put an CNAME record in the live.com DNS to redirect Soapbox.live.com to Soapbox.msn.com.
 
On a lighter note, was everyone else as disturbed as I was by the disco/robot/etc butterfly?

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 7:00:04 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Marketing | Microsoft | MSN

Virtual Earth Mobile Updated

The Windows Mobile team has posted to their blog about an update to Virtual Earth Mobile. The new version is 1.67, and includes an option for a traffic overlay and a bunch of other fixes.

Virtual Earth Mobile is one of my favorite free Windows Mobile applications.  It runs great on my Motorola Q, and after I figured out how to hook up my Bluetooth GPS, it became very useful for in-city navigation.

I experienced some of the same install hiccups that others were commenting on on the update announcement post, but after doing a manual uninstall of the old version and restarting my Q, it installed fine.

If you've got a mobile device with an internet connection, this is a must-have package, and if you've got a Bluetooth GPS, it rocks!

I haven't checked, but I don't think they have updated the version posted to ViaVirtualEarth, so make sure you grab the cab file from the Windows Mobile Team Blog post.

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 5:09:04 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Mapping | Microsoft | Mobiles

Vista SKU Soup Runs Counter to "Connected Person" Ideal

MSFN is reporting that all Vista Editions will be included on the same DVD, but that the discs will be color coded to indicate which version the consumer purchased.  The good news is that consumers will be able to upgrade to a higher version of Vista if they decide they need more features.  I still think that the number of different SKUs is excessive, and it's going to lead to confusion.  Especially with things that we've read like splitting off the Fax functionality to the Business SKUs. 

Microsoft likes to talk about how we're going to be connected everywhere we go.  How our digital life, both work and personal, will be able to follow us.  Just like we take the occasional personal call or email at work, many folks field business communications, and do real work during their "personal" time.  Segmenting the functionality of Vista runs counter to this "Connected Person" ideal.  I know they are trying to increase revenue by offering differentiated products, but they are doing so at the expense of some of the consistency of the platform.

I'm hoping that if any of the feature splits end up being pain points for consumers, that Microsoft will do the right thing and just offer a free update to correct the issue, instead of constantly repeating the "you can pay to upgrade" mantra. 

Tuesday, September 19, 2006 4:58:33 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Microsoft

Apple's iTV points to the future.

I watched Engadget's coverage of the Apple announcements (and by "watched, I mean I contributed to the slowing of their servers by repeatedly hitting F5 the whole time), and I'm intrigued by the iTV announcement.  I actually went looking for something similar a few weeks back when Amazon's UnBox launched.  While many folks are lauding Apple for this innovation, I disagree that this is really innovation, it's just the next logical step.

There are devices out there already that provide a way to shove content to a TV wirelessly, but that are about as expensive as the proposed iTV, and much more difficult to work with.  The folks at Apple will probably make the iTV experience pretty user-friendly.

The interesting point of this whole thing is that during the iTV announcement, I had my first "Maybe I don't really need cable or satellite anymore" moment.  If we get to the point (not far away now) where all the content I watch can be downloaded or streamed, then why should I keep paying DirecTV?  I can buy a lot of a la cart programming for what I pay in satellite bills each month.  If the local news channels get on board with this new form of content distribution, then I really won't be missing anything.

It is a bit of a leap conceptually though.  People generally don't feel bad about sitting down for an hour to watch a television show because we're conforming to the TV's schedule.  If all my content is on-demand, then I'm probably going to watch less TV because watching an hour long show means I'm more overtly committing that time.  Since the show can fit into my schedule now, it'll get prioritized just like everything else, and many shows would probably fall off the bottom end of the priority stack.

Sunday, September 17, 2006 1:52:21 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [0]  Media

Things the search engines can't help you find

Tonight I have something stuck in my eye.  I'm guessing it's an eyelash, but I don't know for sure because I can't get it out.  I figured that the internet would yield some tips for me, so in between opening my eyes under water and dousing with saline drops, I decided to hit up Google and Windows Live Search.  I tried various combinations of "eyelash", "eyelid", "stuck", "remove". I even through some desperate pleas at the search engines with plain language queries.

Almost every result I found had to deal with fake eyelashes, makeup, or contact lenses.  The internet failed me tonight.  The problem is that the search engines still see my queries as keywords, and they don't know what I really mean.  Either that, or there really are no tips on the internet for getting eyelashes out of your eye. I can't really believe the latter.  The internet is supposed to know everything.

I know I've had several of these "the search engines are useless for this" moments in the past.  I'll try to remember some more.  Does anyone else have any experiences with situations like this? 

 

Sunday, September 10, 2006 11:49:58 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)      Comments [3]  Random | Search