Searching For Intelligent Life

Last month Microsoft bought enterprise search vendor Fast, and now is about to end up with Yahoo. What's interesting besides the $45 billion dollars, that will probably end up at $50ish, is that this isn't the right business ultimately.

Search is the core of everything IT moving forward, and arguably has been the key forever, we just didn't know it. Today the fight is over eyeballs and the money is in advertising, and advertising based on someone trying to find something is completely logical. Eyeballs are always nice, but eyeballs alone won't hold the value that Google commands forever, and thus chasing them makes limited sense to me.

Instead, folks should realize that the search economy, that most have missed, is ultimately predicated upon not just pushing the equivalent of web billboards to a possible or probable audience of interest, but the combination of much greater understanding of the searcher's intent and who/where the searcher is.

The real value will come when someone gives me the result I actually want, instead of every possible result. The only way that will happen is when they know about me – know what I like or hate, what I do, where I am, etc. I'm going to be too paranoid to let that happen, but my kids won't.

When Google enters the cell phone industry it won't be because they like the billions Verizon makes –at least not just because of that. It will be because they are going to dominate the entire market for the next generation of users – my kids. They are going to give away what is today paid for. They will give my kids a cell phone, that they won't use, opting instead to have a text machine with advertisements. They will know when my kid walks by a Starbucks and then will push a coupon to her suggesting a super double mega spazaccino with frothy Bolivian goat milk, and she will go spend the 9 bucks on it. They will even know she did it, which will tell them even more about her. They will be marketing to an individual – and that is what is interesting about search. Sure, they might destroy the normal cell phone market as we know it along the way, but I think that's secondary.

Search needs to combine individual structured elements with unstructured query capabilities in order to really be helpful to that individual. That means for all the privacy you don't know that Google has stolen already, it will get worse. That's why I'll freak out, and why my kids will end up unknowingly telling whoever asks every private thought, feeling, and action they ever do. It's kind of scary, but it already is happening.

Kids are smart, they embrace technology without fear. Kids are dumb; they don't have a clue that their electronic communications are evidence to be used against them. When we were kids we made a plan by actually talking to each other. If no one overheard our devious plans, it was as if they didn't happen. My kids post their devious plans on the Internet, in their cell phones (I mean texting devices), in photographs, and on their computers. They think the delete key keeps them protected. My daughter doesn't even know you need to (or even can) empty the recycle bin. She gets caught at everything, then acts amazed the way a 4 years old does when their mother uses the eyes in the back of her head to catch them touching something they shouldn't be.

The point is that it isn't about doing what is right for the benefit of all; it is about doing what is probably wrong for the benefit of money. The value of search combined with the fuzzy line of ethical knowledge is killer – and that's why it will happen. The next generation of big money spenders is the perfect place to start, due to the no fear/dumb as a box of rocks combination. In any case, being truly effective (and thus being able to charge really fantastic amounts of money to advertisers) is predicated on far deeper individual knowledge.

Since the play is so obvious (to me anyway) that someone will eventually write a legitimate privacy regulation or two, and force opt-in actions, but it won't matter, because the kids will say yes as long as they can send pictures and text until their fingers bleed. That's why Microsoft has to make a real play in this area if they want to remain relevant long term. If the government took 20 years to worry about Microsoft's antitrust monopolistic tactics (none of which I blame them for – hell, we're all jealous) because they won the operating system war and thus have an unfair advantage selling applications, how will they go about protecting us when the king of search is giving away all their services? Can you have a monopoly if everything is free and opted in by the users? That's an interesting question – since clearly the answer is yes, but how does one break up free? You don't, and that's why this game being played out in front of us has the greatest ramifications on the world of business and human behavior ever. The global economy is based on selling stuff to people. The more you know about the individual, the more you can target or exploit that individual. When you crack that code, billions of dollars are meaningless as we move deep into trillions. Moving that way by having people willingly tell us about themselves and allow us to observe their behavior appears to be the way to bypass anybody ever being able to do anything about it (legally) – except for the next competitor. By then, however, it may be too late. Big brother will have everything he needs.

John Battelle wrote a great book on early search wars (The Search) and blogs at battellemedia.com. He doesn't get into the conspiracy theory but it's a great history and certainly made me think. More to come on this, as I believe the combination of individual understanding and search logic can be a huge benefit – like actually giving me what I want instead of pages of crap – but only within the rules of human decency. It is this combination that really fascinates me in terms of how commercial communities of practice could derive huge value in terms of elevated education and intelligence, and what that might mean.

Comments

[Cuyler]

Excellent writeup. It's very true and not just about search. It's about the whole interaction between computers (electronics) and the daily life of individuals.

We're getting to a point where the young people of today (and future of society) grew up with GUI's, the internet and the ability to contact anyone and be contacted at anytime (pagers, cellphones, e-mail, sms, etc...). People entering the work world today wouldn't even remember opening up a DOS window and trying to think of the right word to type in order to get the computer to do what you want to do.

My father just got Office 2008 and absolutely can't stand the idea of not having the simple file menu layout that we've used for over 20 years. The whole ribbon idea just doesn't "think" the say way we do. Young people starting out just happen to think differently than we do and we're just going to have to catch up.

[Lisa Young]

Steve,

Great post! I work in search and you are right about where it is headed. I share your concern that kids are all too eager to adapt new technologies, but fail to understand the consequences of giving up their privacy and even rights to the content they produce.

I believe the marketplace does dictate some of these practices. Users did give Facebook pause when privacy concerns were raised. MySpace did at least attempt to come up with policies to protect minors. Ask has rolled out AskEraser as a challenge to Google's continued attempts to monetize your personal search history. Wikiasearch was recently launched in alpha with a founding principle of protecting user privacy. I'm waiting to see if users support these initiatives. That's truly the key to their success.

I routinely discuss online privacy and safety issues with my daughter. She will be allowed to use the technology when she doesn't have to lie about her age during sign up. Then I'll really have to get busy monitoring and coaching her how to manage her online reputation.

Considering that how she presents herself online could impact her getting into her choice of colleges or landing a job, it's a parenting task that's worth the effort. Parents, you don't really have a choice here. The adoption of social media by teens and tweens has already happened. It's part of their everyday lives. The question is whether parents can adapt in order to keep their kids out of trouble.