My advisor, Oren Etzioni, gave the second keynote at WSDM today. His main focus is on his latest work which is a new paradigm in search using open extraction.
His hypothesis: Use Machine Reading - Information Extraction + tractable inference. For example, who did what? E.G.
IE(sentence) = who did what? - speaker(Alon Halevy, UW)
Inference = uncover implicit information - Will Alon visit Seattle? (maybe… is UW University of Washington or University of Waterloo?)
His argument, in part based on systems like Opine (done by Ana-Maria Popescu, another of Oren’s students and now at Yahoo Research), is information extraction enables very rich applications to be built.
How do you make it work on the Web? Open IE - Self-supervised Information Extraction (Banko, Cafarella, Soderland, et al, IJCAI ‘07). This leads him to find triples of (Noun-Phrase, Verb, Noun-Phrase).
More later (possibly even references… y’know, auto-tagging on blogs would actually be really useful…)

buy viagra
buy viagra online
viagra online
discount viagra
order viagra
cheap viagra
generic viagra
generica viagra
viagra buy
viagra price
order viagra online
viagra generic
viagra pill
where buy viagra
buy viagra cheap
viagra order
get viagra
buy online viagra
online viagra
viagra sale online
where to buy viagra
cheapest viagra
purchase viagra
cheap viagra online
viagra buy online
buying viagra
buy viagra on
generic viagra canada
prescription viagra
buy viagra norway
generic viagra pack
buy viagra in nevada
buy viagra now online
viagra online buy
find viagra online
buy cheap viagra online
cheap generic viagra
buy cheap viagra
generic viagra online
viagra sale
generic viagra cheap
buy viagra on line
where buy generic viagra
viagra online bestellen
viagra prescription online
generic online viagra
low price viagra
cheapest viagra price
buy generic viagra
viagra uk
viagra online prescription
cheap est viagra
viagra soft tab
viagra discount
viagra cheap
where to buy viagra on line
buying viagra online
buy viagra now
purchase viagra online
viagra pharmacy
natural viagra
buy viagra in canada
viagra paypal
viagra on line
viagra 100mg
viagra without prescription
cheapest place to buy viagra online
generic Cialis
buy cialis
buy cialis online
cialis online
online cialis
order cialis
cheap cialis
discount Cialis
generic cialis price
cialis prescription
buy cialis generic
cialis online discount
cheapest cialis
buy discount cialis
purchase cheap cialis online
order cialis online
cialis for sale
cialis price
purchase cialis
cialis online pharmacy
buy Cheap Cialis
cialis story
generic cialis online
best cialis price
cheapest cialis generic
order generic cialis
low cost cialis
buy cialis generic online
levitra
buy levitra
cheap levitra
levitra online
buy levitra online
order levitra
order levitra online
cialis levitra
generic levitra
online levitra
buy cheap levitra
discount levitra
levitra sale
buy generic levitra
levitra online pharmacy
levitra price
purchase levitra
cheap levitra online
levitra story
levitra on line
levitra prescription
levitra cheap
best price for levitra
buy xanax
buy phentermine
buy lasix
tramadol
buy tramadol
buy tramadol online
tramadol online
cheap tramadol
order tramadol
tramadol hcl
ultram tramadol
tramadol prescription
online tramadol
tramadol sale
purchase tramadol
buy cheap tramadol
order tramadol online
overnight tramadol
tramadol cheap
tramadol pharmacy
discount tramadol
tramadol hydrochloride
tramadol 50mg
cheap tramadol online
generic tramadol
buy clomid
buy prozac
buy cipro
buy diflucan
buy acomplia
buy lexapro
buy flagyl
buy propecia
order propecia
cheap propecia
propecia online
order propecia online
buy propecia online
generic propecia
compare propecia
propecia without prescription
propecia prescription
propecia pill
discount propecia
online propecia
cheapest propecia
get propecia
propecia order
propecia price
propecia uk
propecia cost
propecia sale
purchase propecia
buy cheap propecia
propecia sale online
buy online propecia
online pharmacy propecia
online prescription propecia
buy generic propecia
buying propecia
buy propecia now
buy fosamax
buy kamagra
buy clomid online
buy prozac online
buy cipro online
buy diflucan online
buy acomplia online
buy lexapro online
buy flagyl online

Right now, there’s about 40 +/- 10 people from Microsoft, Yahoo, and Google in close proximity, along with other associated industry folks. So, as you can imagine, there’s a lot of scuttlebutt about the Microsoft / Yahoo acquisition. Here’s some of it (names withheld to protect the guilty… and hey, this is GOSSIP! Unsubstantiated rumor! Yellow journalism! Cite it at your own risk!)

• A bunch of Microsofties are very wary of the deal, for reasons largely along the lines I mentioned previously.
• A bunch of Yaholligans (Yahoochers?) are “just not thinking about it.”

Neither side is saying they saw this coming (as opposed to search pundits everywhere). And, as near as I can see, everyone is just going about as normal. The Yahoo recruiting booth is sandwiched right between the Google and Microsoft booths at WSDM (eBay and Ask are off to the side… ah, the exhibit hall is rich with metaphor!).

So, my worthless stock advice du jour: pay close attention to what Microsoft does in the near future. We’ll probably know how serious they are very quickly. Personally, if they go down the hostile acquisition route, that feels like a “bet the company” maneuver, which would surprise me greatly for Microsoft to do that.

I’m attending WSDM 2008 down in Stanford, CA. Lots of people from the big three (at least for now ), and other usual suspects. Hector Garcia-Molina is giving the initial keynote, and has a great slide going over a number of “Holy Cow” moments. In order:

• WWW (1993)
• Link Search (using links to rank popularity) (1994)
• A URL on a Billboard (1998)
• Napster (1999)
• “To Google” on a sitcom (2003)
• WiFi on busses - access everywhere (2007)
• FaceBook (2008)

Then he had some challenges, and it’s interesting to think of how many are still viable:

• Preservation (1993). Turns out, opening old formats (say ~5 years old) is often painful… and even if the format opens, formatting is often horribly broken. Consider old Word docs, or even WordPerfect or such. I can’t imagine what I’d do about ancient docs I may have when I wrote things on a Mac using WriteNow…
• Digital Deterioration (1998). Sometimes, documents just get lost… or URLs go away, and so on.

Current challenge problems (2008). Hector mentioned that this is the WSDM program, so not necessarily his list.

• Beyond Search

• Identifying user task / intention
• Document/Word Semantics

• Extraction, entity resolution
• Combinging Results

• Ads, bids, …
• Spam, Click Fraud, etc.

• modeling
• wisdom of the crowds

• Media Mining
• Mining Graphs

• Safe data mining
• Protecting identity

• Power Minimization
• Revisiting Distributed Databases

• Access to personal data
• Tailoring services to me

• Small devices
• Peer-to-peer libraries

Hectors priorities:

1. Beyond Search
2. Information Integration
3. Monetizing
4. Social Networking
5. Coping with Scale

Lower Priorities:

• Data Mining
• Privacy
• Personalization
• Mobile Access

He didn’t care so much about Privacy, as he has nothing to hide. He also doesn’t like Personalization, as he doesn’t like things that change. He opened the floor for dissenters, some people took him up on it.

As far as hardness goes:

1. Information Integration
2. Beyond Search
3. Monetizing
4. Social Networks
5. Privacy

and the rest, as “easy:”

• Data Mining
• Coping with Scale
• Personalization
• Mobile Access

I’ll see if I can’t find some time to comment on this later on tonight.

Google whines about Microsoft buying Yahoo! Emphasis mine:

The openness of the Internet is what made Google — and Yahoo! — possible. A good idea that users find useful spreads quickly. Businesses can be created around the idea. Users benefit from constant innovation. It’s what makes the Internet such an exciting place. So Microsoft’s hostile bid for Yahoo! raises troubling questions. This is about more than simply a financial transaction, one company taking over another. It’s about preserving the underlying principles of the Internet: openness and innovation.

Could Microsoft now attempt to exert the same sort of inappropriate and illegal influence over the Internet that it did with the PC? While the Internet rewards competitive innovation, Microsoft has frequently sought to establish proprietary monopolies — and then leverage its dominance into new, adjacent markets.

Could the acquisition of Yahoo! allow Microsoft — despite its legacy of serious legal and regulatory offenses — to extend unfair practices from browsers and operating systems to the Internet? In addition, Microsoft plus Yahoo! equals an overwhelming share of instant messaging and web email accounts. And between them, the two companies operate the two most heavily trafficked portals on the Internet. Could a combination of the two take advantage of a PC software monopoly to unfairly limit the ability of consumers to freely access competitors’ email, IM, and web-based services? Policymakers around the world need to ask these questions — and consumers deserve satisfying answers.

This hostile bid was announced on Friday, so there is plenty of time for these questions to be thoroughly addressed. We take Internet openness, choice and innovation seriously. They are the core of our culture. We believe that the interests of Internet users come first — and should come first — as the merits of this proposed acquisition are examined and alternatives explored.

Kind of inflammatory, isn’t it? Well, yeah. But why do you think Microsoft whined to the SEC about Google buying DoubleClick?

Microsoft responds:

REDMOND, Wash., Feb. 3, 2008 – The combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! will create a more competitive marketplace by establishing a compelling number two competitor for Internet search and online advertising. The alternative scenarios only lead to less competition on the Internet.

Today, Google is the dominant search engine and advertising company on the Web. Google has amassed about 75 percent of paid search revenues worldwide and its share continues to grow. According to published reports, Google currently has more than 65 percent search query share in the U.S. and more than 85 percent in Europe. Microsoft and Yahoo! on the other hand have roughly 30 percent combined in the U.S. and approximately 10 percent combined in Europe.

Microsoft is committed to openness, innovation, and the protection of privacy on the Internet. We believe that the combination of Microsoft and Yahoo! will advance these goals.

Right…. so in summary, Google doesn’t want Microsoft to buy into two Internet monopolies - instant messaging and e-mail, and use that as leverage to break into its emerging ad monopoly. And Microsoft wants to do just that.

Get your popcorn.

So that was probably the best SuperBowl I can remember. Sure, the Steelers’ victory in SuperBowl XL was the most satisfying, as my Steelers pulled it out. But this was the first game I was pretty much glued to… there was no room for error, and every mistake or great play could well be “the play of the game.” The first two drives gave a preview of a “field goal for touchdown” type game. But then the defenses stepped up and kept up until the fourth quarter, when both QBs started to pass more and make key drives.

At the end of the day, the Patriots’ D blinked first, and Eli and the Giants managed to pick up two touchdowns in exchange for one, defeating the undefeated. Wow.

Oh, and I was rooting for the Giants… mostly because I was rooting against Belichek. But that’s just me.

So, after years and years and years, Microsoft is finally buying Yahoo!. OK, they’ve made an offer, but really, how often does Company A make a big public notice about an offer only for Company B to say, “Um, no thanks…” The writing was pretty much on the wall when Semel was booted and Jerry Yang became the CEO (Oh, and in an aside, he just left the Yahoo! Board of Directors…. yeah, the deal is pretty much done.). So right now every talking and writing head is busy sizing up the deal and making broad predictions. There’s lots to be said for the pro and the con side. So, rather than actually give some predictions, I’ll see if I can’t analyze the two sides and see where things might end up. To start, I’ll talk about the cons.

Microsoft and Yahoo: It can’t possibly work
There’s lots of reasons why Yahoo and Microsoft won’t work. Here are a couple:

1. Neither Microsoft nor Yahoo has shown it can take share away from Google. Microsoft is in fact losing share. So putting Microsoft in charge of a bigger operation will simply cause share to evaporate from Yahoo as well as Microsoft.
2. Yahoo is a Linux shop, and the core technical expertise really won’t transfer well. Anyone remember the Hotmail.com acquisition? But hey, Google is just up the street!
3. Independent of Microsoft vs Linux technologies, Yahoo is a much different culture than Microsoft, even Microsoft’s SVC campus. The people just won’t mesh.
4. Microsoft execs really won’t be able to manage Yahoo. Parting out Yahoo to the appropriate teams (Search and MSN, mostly) will randomize those teams. Having one local exec in charge in California will also be unlikely to work, as Yahoo will turn into a random fiefdom competing with Search and MSN.
5. The ~5 years it’ll take for Microsoft to absorb Yahoo on the portal side alone (Hotmail + Yahoo Mail, MSN Money + Yahoo Finance, MSN Messenger + Yahoo Messenger, etc.) will distract from doing something new that’ll convince customers to leave Google.

That’s good enough for now. But let’s pause for a moment and ponder… what if Ballmer isn’t a complete idiot, and this will work?

Microsoft and Yahoo: The Giant Awakens
Let’s pause for a moment and think about what Microsoft and Yahoo look like together…

1. Yahoo Search now with MSN Technology. I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again… meta-search beats regular search for relevance when the engines being used are roughly the same quality. Go ahead, try MetaCrawler with just Google, Yahoo, and MSN. Better yet, compare Google with Yahoo + MSN (click on the lovely buttons to see the results side by side). This will make search better, and all Microsoft entry points will have it (Yahoo, MSN, Live, etc.).
2. MSN / Live is now Yahoo. Microsoft completely botched their “Windows Live” and “Live” offering. Now, rather than go back to MSN (which they didn’t like, thus the new brand), or pick a new brand from scratch (putting them in the same boat as Live), they have a new brand. A good brand. One people like. Yahoo! MSN Messenger and Hotmail will probably survive, but the rest will likely transform into their Yahoo branded counterparts, slowly but surely. Granted, the technology will almost certainly be Microsoft under the hood.
3. Complete portal dominance. AOL is going to scream at this, assuming their new Time Warner lords and masters care. MSN and Yahoo Messenger will be combined. Yahoo Mail and Hotmail will be combined. MSN Money and Yahoo Finance will be combined. MSN and Yahoo home pages will be one and the same. For all intents and purposes, the new entity will be “The Portal.”
4. Combined infrastructure services. It isn’t just the consumer-facing services that will benefit. Hotmail and Yahoo will combine their anti-spam and anti-phishing technology (hell, you can just cascade them and likely get a huge improvement). Yahoo Search and MSN Search will combine their anti-spam in search for fantastic index quality. And things go from there.
5. MSR + Yahoo Research. Yeah, a number of people from Yahoo Research left MSR (Usama Fayyad), but there are some serious heavy hitters at Yahoo Research: Prabhakar Raghavan, Andrei Broder, Ricardo Baeza-Yates, and Ron Brachman to name a few.

Yeah, lots of reasons… so people will go back and forth. But here’s my own thoughts on why this will work, to some degree, no matter what:

The ad market wants a strong #2 to keep #1 honest.

It doesn’t take much to find lots of grumbling about Google’s policies towards advertisers, especially in the syndication market. Lots of people feel Google is charging more than it should. With Microsoft now as the #2 player, the market will do what it can to ensure Microsoft is strong enough to keep Google honest. Certainly, the market won’t care if Microsoft remains #2 forever, but two choices is good. Incidentally, the same doesn’t hold for whomever is in the #3 position. The market will encourage #2 to survive, but #3 and down… best of luck, gentlemen.

Finally, here’s another thought. The ad business is cyclical, and we haven’t really seen a downturn in ad spending… yet. But all signs point to a downturn coming. Microsoft is actually making some serious bank on Vista (surprise!) and Office, and will certainly offer very aggressive pricing to gain market share in an ad downturn from Google. I’m not saying short Google, but boy would I be hard-pressed to buy now….

Update 2/11/08: OK, I know nothing, and this deal wasn’t previously in the works like I thought. So don’t come to me for stock advice!