Catching Up in the Jobs “Race”


Google has just released data on the ethnic and gender background of the people who inhabit the Googleplex…and Shockingly it turns out that they are mostly white guys….by a large margin 60% white 70% male. The second largest (30%) ethnicity claimed is Asian which includes people in many cases imported directly from the Indian subcontinent. If you are lucky enough to ever visit the Google Plex the evidence of your own eyes will confirm the data….it is dazzlingly white and male with a very strong Indian/Asian component.  Indeed Google serves some of the best Indian food you will find anywhere in their cafeteria.

 My company has a healthy mixture of folk. We are based in SoCal (as opposed to Silicon Valley) so we are lucky enough to have a wider range of employees..but a quick headcount reveals broadly similar data. Like Google it’s not that we try to hire in any particular direction but we can only employ people who apply and are qualified for the work at hand. If the graduates in computer science and math are predominantly white or Asian males that’s going to wash through in the employment demographics. It’s an industry wide problem and not one that is amenable to immediate correction.

We aren’t the first industry to be plagued by this kind of problem. For example a generation ago the medical profession was overwhelmingly male now it’s much more balanced; in 2012 47.3% of people entering medical school were female. The tech industry focused around Silicon Valley is a much more recent industry than medicine. The high profile, high value jobs it’s famous for have really only been around for 20 years…if that.  Before the tech boom the same math and computer graduates would have ended up spread over IT and education and been unremarked…another white nerdy math professor….no big deal.  Now that our industry regularly mints billionaires barely old enough to rent cars it looks a lot more dramatic…but it’s really more a quirk of fate rather than an evil plot. I expect this to level out probably even faster than medicine.

The fabulous wealth and opportunity our industry represents will attract the best talent and I’d expect that talent to reflect the gene pool pretty quickly. Women will catch up perhaps in a couple of graduation cycles and minorities will catch up as fast as their societal challenges allow.  It’s always been tougher for a very smart kid born into poverty to achieve the same things people dealt a better hand expect as their birthright….but it can be done and I look forward to that brave new and much more diverse world.

Google and Apple Squeezing into the Home Security Market


Home security is big business. It’s worth in the region of $25Bn per year projected to grow to north of $35Bn by 2017. It’s also an industry ripe for technological enrichment, as our homes get smarter it makes sense that our home security systems get smarter too. My home security is a 100lb American bulldog called Hedwig…we also happen to have ADT installed…but I have to believe Hedwig is a more effective deterrent albeit probably not as smart as some of the new home systems. It looks like Google is planning a move further into home security through Nest, its recent $3.2 billion acquisition that has put a high-tech twist on thermostats and smoke alarms. The company is considering buying the connected camera startup Dropcam.

Dropcam’s main product is a camera that saves its footage to the cloud, letting users check the recordings anytime and anywhere. The startup recently bolstered its security offering with improved video analysis technology and waterproof Tabs, which can detect motion in areas you couldn’t place a camera. Last year it announced a $30 million round of venture funding.

An expansion into home security would be in keeping with Nest’s mission of rethinking household technology for the 21st century. “Safety shouldn’t be annoying,” Nest CEO Tony Fadell told The Verge last year when unveiling the Protect smoke detector. “We’re about reinventing unloved categories.” That’s a mission that Dropcam’s investors got behind, with Kleiner Perkins’ Trae Vassallo saying last year that “Dropcam can do for surveillance cameras what Nest did for the thermostat.”

Apple is set to make its own play for the connected home next month, according to a report in the Financial Times. Cupertino will reportedly offer a platform for third-party vendors to hook into the iPhone, allowing it to control lighting, security systems, and more. Apple is said to consider privacy an advantage over Google, which leverages user data for advertising revenue and recently told the SEC it could serve ads on “refrigerators, car dashboards, thermostats” in the future — though it later denied any connection with the Nest acquisition. The iOS smart home software may be announced at Apple’s Worldwide Developers Conference on June 2nd.

Solar Panel Roadways: Lighting the Future Ahead?

I haven’t had an electricity bill in nearly two years.  Each month our household is more or less net neutral…on a good month we are actually net contributors to the national grid. This is possible because I live in sunny SoCal and I have solar power. Two years after being proposed as an alternative power for many homes and businesses, US electrical engineer Scott Brusaw’s system of solar powered roads is in the second prototype stage, which could lead to wide spread use. Scott’s idea is to cover highways and other roadways with photo-voltaic panels that would collect energy and feed it into a decentralized power grid. If successful, these panels could generate enough energy to power the entire country. It’s an interesting perhaps genius idea with several barriers to entry.  Solar is pretty big here in SoCal, I inherited mine with the house so I didn’t have to put up the capital directly. If I had it would likely have cost enough that I’d be looking at a twenty year payback. Photo voltaic is expensive to manufacture….scaling the current technology up in such a grand way is a very impressive idea.

As a kid in the 1960s, before most people had even heard of solar power, Scott Brusaw imagined “electric roads.” Almost five decades and two government-funded prototypes later, the electrical engineer from Ohio is on his way to raising $1 million to start producing solar panels for our streets and highways. Not to power the light, mind you—to function as streets and highways. Soon you may be driving on solar panels that power the buildings you’re passing by. One million bucks isn’t going to get anyone much past a Ted Talk…let alone re-engineer our infrastructure.  It’s barely enough to buy the horse to tilt at windmills with…even if the windmills were actually generating wind energy at the time.

“We can use these panels to create roads, parking lots, tarmacs—anything under the sun,” Brusaw says. “All of the current asphalt and concrete currently soaking up the sun can be covered with our technology to turn that sunlight into clean, renewable electricity.”

The biggest challenge Brusaw faced was engineering a case to protect the fragile solar cells. He began by researching the technology used in black boxes for airplanes and ended up using thick hardened glass. It sounds fragile, but after impact resistance and traction testing, it has proved able to handle trucks weighing several times the legal limit. A prototype solar parking lot in Sandpoint, Idaho, has been successful as well.

It may take some time to see them on highways, though. Neil Fromer, executive director of the Resnick Sustainability Institute at the California Institute of Technology, says installing solar power on large structures will take a lot of testing and paperwork.

“The tremendous amount of solar energy that hits the earth’s surface in an hour is enough to power the planet for a year,” Fromer explains. “So when you think about renewable energy in the long term, solar is a huge part of that.” Considering that pavement covers as much as half of many U.S. cities, a lot of electricity could be generated by covering it all with solar panels.

Brusaw’s project could have a huge impact, especially if it overcomes the many challenges to getting it out into the real world.

“I think this is pretty cool, and I don’t want to sound too pessimistic about it,” Fromer says. “It’s really just a question of integrating solar energy into our existing electrical system. Roads are great surfaces to try it…. Technology innovation always helps.”

Google Buying Word Lens to Boost Google Translate



Back in 2010, a company called Quest Visual debuted an app called Word Lens. It hardly seemed possible, but the app translated a number of different languages in real time using just the smartphone’s camera. Currently, users can translate between English and Portuguese, German, Italian, French, Russian, and Spanish.

It’s easy to see why Google would want to own it — its stated mission is to make all the world’s information searchable in any language — and Google Translate generally does this quite well, at least for web pages.

With Word Lens, iPhone users can translate the world. Apple even featured the app in its recent “Powerful” television ad for the iPhone 5s, and it’s obvious why. Even better, it doesn’t require a connection to the internet, which is another benefit for business travelers.

Being a great translation app doesn’t come without some struggles. Word Lens has trouble with particularly stylized text or handwriting, and the translations will make occasional mistakes. However, most of the time, it will at least get the point across.

The app is currently free to download from the App Store, and is also available on the Google Play Store on the Android market. The translations are available via an in-app purchase, though they are also currently free.

YouTube Dipping Its Toe Into the Video Game Streaming Industry



Google’s YouTube is close to securing a $1 billion buyout of live streaming service Twitch, and has been chosen as the best suitor over many competing companies such as Microsoft.

Twitch is said to believe that Google can help the company become what it wants to be — the definitive platform for watching and streaming live video gaming. The company raised $20 million from investors in 2013 and is likely to turn a profit this year. But capital isn’t enough to allow Twitch to scale its technology and infrastructure to keep pace with its growth. It had plenty of offers from venture capitalists looking to give it more money, said the person, but what it needs is a partner that can help it handle massive amounts of live and user-generated video on a global scale.

Despite not being well known beyond gaming circles, Twitch already pushes more traffic during its peak hours than titans like Facebook and Amazon. “To be quite honest, we can’t keep up with the growth,” Twitch marketing VP Matt DiPietro has stated. Microsoft and others have made serious approaches to Twitch, but YouTube was deemed the better fit. It’s unlikely that the gamer-friendly Twitch would have wanted any part of a deal that would tie the service to Xbox, as it’s embedded in Sony’s rival PlayStation console as well.

YouTube has been interested in testing the game-streaming waters by introducing an API at last year’s Game Developers Conference, but the effort never got much traction in the community — it only opened live streaming capability to all in December. Twitch, meanwhile, has huge mindshare among the video game audience, as evidenced by its role as the streaming platform for all major e-sports tournaments, giving it command over a lucrative advertising demographic. The proposed deal can be compared to Facebook’s $1 billion acquisition of Instagram back in 2012, where an established giant snapped up a fast-growing startup it saw as a potential competitive threat.

Big Brother is Organizing You



Intellectually I understand that we have essentially surrendered our privacy rights in exchange for the cool stuff we get online, however a couple of examples have crossed my digital world recently which illustrate just how pervasive this is becoming. The first happened a couple of days back when I booked a favorite local restaurant for six people at 7pm. At about 6 that evening my iphone coughed politely and a message came up on the home screen to the effect that in current traffic it will take 18 minutes to get to the restaurant so be sure to leave by 6.40 to get there on time. What’s impressive is that I didn’t interact with Google at all in the booking process and set no alarms or reminders. I had booked through Open Table and received the usual email confirmation…which was read by Google (I never opened it) who figured out where both the restaurant and I were and given traffic how long the journey would take. That’s awfully impressive….a bit creepy but still impressive.

What is slightly more creepy is that we are planning a trip to London and Paris in a few weeks. My lovely wife and I booked the travel and hotels through my Orbitz account, we booked separate components through the same account but from different laptops. The confirmation emails went to my email address only. What’s impressive is that we are now both being bombarded with hotel offers for Paris on our separate email and Facebook accounts. Neither of us have mentioned anything about this trip on Facebook at all. Clearly what’s happening is a sophisticated combination cookie delivery and cross platform retargeting.  The fact that we didn’t use Google to search for any travel components makes it even more impressive. Should this level of passive tracking and targeting bother us?…probably not, it’s something between neat and weird but (in my mind anyway) not actually invasive. The utility afforded by the fact that Google (your virtual butler) will let you know when to leave for the airport and even have your boarding pass ready without you asking is undeniably cool…but at least for now I don’t think I want to ride to the airport in one of their self driving cars.

Don’t You…Forget About Me…


As an avid search watcher I realize that most of the stuff which interests entertains or enrages me is of only passing interest to the real world, however yesterday Google lost a case at the highest level in the EU courts….and this may impact a whole bunch of the real world.  The case stems from the complaint of a Spanish man that Google linked his name to an old story in a spanish newspaper about him having his property auctioned off to pay a tax debt. The man in question argued that it was old news and he shouldn’t be continually punished by his name being linked to this resolved item….the European Court of Justice agreed….you have the right “to be forgotten.” They held that the data may “appear to be inadequate, irrelevant or no longer relevant or excessive … in the light of the time that had elapsed.” Essentially anyone resident in the EU can now ask any search engine to erase links to data about them under that definition.

As I look at that definition I have no idea how that ruling could be operated in the real world.  Who gets to decide…and on what criteria?  I guess it’s all cool and very european but how exactly do we deliver on that requirement? Back in the day when I worked for one of the big search engines and had to deal with this kind of stuff we had a simple hard and fast rule. We never responded or acted upon any request to remove data from our index unless we were requested to do so by a court of competent jurisdiction. The rationale was that we were protected by the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and if we responded to one we would have to respond to them all. We indexed publically available content we did not pass judgement on the veracity or timeliness of that content…if you had a problem with that take it up with the website which published that data, if they deleted it we would inevitably delete the link. This new ruling greases exactly that slippery slope and working out the bugs in this strange new world is going to be a nightmare.

The problem is simple, the moment this ruling goes into effect the search engines are going to be deluged with requests to essentially expunge the permanent online records of potentially millions of people. I have no idea how the engines will respond to those requests but you can be pretty sure that the moment a request doesn’t go the way of choice for the complainer the lawsuits will start to fly. The EU has a higher bar than we do in terms of frivolous lawsuits but it’s going to happen. Also, since the engines are firmly headquartered in the US I can hear the class action lawyers sharpening their pencils to find a way to take a run at them on their home turf.

This ruling puts an unfair and unrealistic burden on the search engines. A much simpler solution would have been to make it the responsibility of the person with the problem to resolve the problem with the original publisher of the information…if it’s an old or no longer relevant story maybe they will remove it….maybe not, but making the search engines responsible for that kind of judgement is impractical.  One solution open to them is to simply not index content from those countries or perhaps not display that kind of content on the local versions of their search.  That would essentially force anyone in the EU to go to rather than etc to get search results.  Neither solution makes any sense, but if the legal burden of defending all the cases which will spin out of this mess (and Google defends everything all the way in every court) either of those worse case scenarios could well happen.

Google to Acquire Online Attribution Firm Adometry


Google wants to help advertisers get a better sense of how their online ad campaigns work collectively…especially if that understanding helps them spend with Google more confidently. So Google is in the process of acquiring Adometry, an Austin, Texas-based firm that specializes in online ad attribution–the science of crediting various online ads for influencing a person to take an action, such as clicking on an ad or buying something.

Terms of the deal have not been disclosed, but Google said the acquisition did not have to pass through any federal regulation hurdles. Adometry had raised $8 million in funding in early 2013. For the near future, Adometry will continue to operate as an independent company, Google has stated, we can assume that eventually they will be subsumed into the Borg.

Several years ago, Microsoft made a big push into solving the attribution issue, launching a business that was directly aimed at challenging what Microsoft saw as Google’s disproportionate credit for the success of online advertising at large.

Thus, you might wonder why Google would want to rock the boat. Well, for one thing, the company manages a huge display ad network, as well as an ad exchange. Google wants to capture a larger share of online advertising overall, and needs to convince brands that tactics outside of search ads can work. The company has also made better analytics a priority of late, including the Google AnalyticsPremium business, which helps website owners better manage their data, traffic, and ad reporting. Adometry’s tools and technology will be used to help bolster that business. What’s raising industry eyebrows is that a leading traffic cop (Adometry) has now been purchased by what is effectively the biggest traffic provider/broker.  It can claim it’s honest but it can’t claim it’s disinterested anymore. Google is notoriously hard to question or challenge. Things are how they say they are…this is not likely to make that different.

There’s a possible side benefit to the Adometry deal that Google executives didn’t mention. Adometry has roots in online ad fraud prevention. In fact, in 2011, the online ad fraud detection firm Click Forensics acquired Adometry and assumed its name. Google has made a point of being a leader in rooting out bogus traffic, fake sites, bots and the like.

A few months ago, Google acquired, another anti-fraud specialist. With Adometry and Spider in the fold, Google can make a claim to be making a serious investment toward protecting its advertisers…it remains to be seen as to whether it polices its self as vigorously as others.

Google Glass: Not Just a Toy Anymore?


Google Glass may be great for taking videos on the fly, and getting directions without bumping into people on the street. Beyond that, the wearable device has become something of a tired novelty, thanks to widespread privacy concerns and an array of self-aggrandizing characters in the Glass Explorer program. (Even reliable tech booster Robert Scoble has declared he’s no longer interested in using Glass.)

But there’s surprisingly good news for Google in that most mundane of business environments: the warehouse.

The company Active Ants, ships products for 50 online stores, gave Google Glass to its stock pickers, whom take product off the warehouse shelves, check it off an inventory list and ready it for shipping.

During a week-long experiment, Active Ants found that giving Glass and a custom-built stock app to two of these warehouse workers reduced their error rate by 12% — and increased their speed at stock picking by 15%.

Translate that to a major fulfillment operation, such as Amazon, and you could be talking millions in savings.

“Traditionally, the pickers at Active Ants would walk around with pick lists specifying products, locations and quantities,” Jeroen Dekker, a managing partner at the Dutch company. “This information is now displayed on Google Glass.” Dekker outlined four reasons why the wearable device made the pickers more efficient:

The first benefit is that the picker’s hands are now free to access products in the shelves. The second benefit is taking a progressive step towards a paperless world: lists no longer need to be printed, signed and bound. The third and probably the biggest advantage is the time saved by sending orders directly to the Google Glass, without first printing, signing and binding them. The fourth benefit is error reduction. Since the orders appear one by one on the Glass, orders cannot be mixed or forgotten. The traditional paper pick list contains a long list of all orders, which increases the chance of mixing up or missing orders.

It also needs wider testing: Two workers over one week isn’t likely to convince the world’s larger warehouse operators. But the experiment is at least a glimpse of hope for Google — that its next-generation platform may, like a lot of technology, make money in a market its creators never anticipated.

Google Has Proof That Local Search Advertising is Good


It’s not a complete surprise….Google has new evidence that local search advertising is good for you. The whole world of local search and search advertising has been a complicated mess for many years. The traditional search driven ecommerce equation where searchers click on ads which then turn into online sales at a measurable rate breaks down when we are searching online but shopping in local stores. The problem is that most of what we buy we buy in person within a few miles of where we live. There are several potential buyers of local search inventory. These include local businesses advertising locally (think Joe the Plumber), national brands looking to drive traffic to local locations (think Jiffy Lube) and national brands looking to drive local results (think Procter and gamble).

The hyper local world of local dentists and plumbers stumbling online and spending money to drive some kind of traffic to some kind of online presence without really understanding or measuring the results is apparently skyrocketing. We see this every day when we look at the inflated prices this kind of search is getting. That influx of new money from dentists and plastic surgeons is good but it’s not enough to stop the slide in average click value caused by the migration to of searchers mobile devices. The problem the search engines have is that it’s much tougher to attribute results to spend when the spend is delivered off line. Traditional media has a century of history and studies linking traditional media spend to offline purchase.  Search has a decade of date which exactly attributes search spend to online sales. Folks like us who focus on measurable local results through online spend use things like tracked calls to link spend to results as closely as we can. It’s much tougher to link a search to an offline purchase.

What the search engines want is to corner a large chunk of traditional media spend and coral it into their camp as opposed to display or social spend. True success in this area will only come when the really large brand spenders believe and can prove well enough to satisfy the marketing community that spending money on local clicks will drive foot traffic and offline purchases…which is where the most recent Google/ipso media survey comes in.

Essentially they tracked  four and a half thousand smart phone users and looked at what they searched for and what they bought. They discovered (surprise!) that online searches greatly enhanced the likelihood of offline purchases. That’s not staggering, we all know anecdotally from our own experience that in many cases that’s what’s going on. Will this kind of “it’ll be great!” fairly anecdotal data be enough to convince the big brand advertisers to spend on local search they way they spend on locally targeted TV and radio…the jury is out on that.