Sometimes It's What They Don't Say

Peter Norvig demo'd an upcoming feature from Google at Web 2.0 that will allow you to see clusters of search results related to specific search terms. The concept is you put in, for example, someone's name, and you get a list of related links that help you focus the search based on the fact the terms you searched for are frequently associated with other terms. So when you try "George Bush", you get search clusters including "dubya," "jenna," "gaffe," and "idiot" (among others). "John Kerry" produces his own long list — but no "idiot."

Commuters, Rejoice!

Adam Curry's directory for where to get yer podcasts (automatically transferable to your little white-n-silver pal using iPodder).

Good Morning San Francisco (Web 2.0, Day 3)

Jason blogged (and podcast) Cory.

Mitch Kapor: "If Thomas Paine were writing Common Sense today, he'd be doing it on a Linux laptop."

New reads:

• O'Reilly's forthcoming Make magazine, edited by Mark Frauenfelder. Dale Dougherty says it's "Martha Stewart for Geeks." Using tech the way we use cooking, craft — tools to use to share creations with others.


• In similar (if speedier) vein, Phillip Torrone writes Hack A Day for Weblogs, Inc.

Speaking Of Spending Eye-Popping Amounts On Enterprise Software

Dennis Kennedy has a great rant on this as to the legal industry over at The Blawg Channel: "[F]axes!! It's almost 2005!"

Day 2.0, Web 2.0

My only recently de-melted TiBook has been wheezing and coughing all day, so between that and frequent visits with Master Tyler (we're working on getting him a tiny lanyard and badge) my ability to blog today in any detail went out the window — and hopefully smited several of the incredibly loud, obnoxious, and decidedly baby nap-hating hotel strikers below. No worries, Jason Calcanis and Sean Bonner are doing a super job over at the Weblogs, Inc. Web 2.0 Blog, complete with a flurry of MP3s from the sessions. Podcasting is getting a lot of buzz here. (Recursion excursion: when enough people link a word to its Google results, does Google eventually list its own search in the results? Just wonderin'.) Scott Rosenberg has good coverage and commentary from yesterday, including this on making sure your slides are stripped of confidentiality labels before flashing them at a conference (!). And Jeff is just a machine, Buzz or otherwise.

From my analog notepad:

• Dave Sifry mentioned the following direct correlation: the more people that link to a site, the more likely the site is to have a syndication feed.
• DJ Danger Mouse (The Grey Album) stole the show on the music panel. Cory and JD asked good questions about whether today's musicians will be dissuaded by the copyright structure from sampling. Short answer: man, no way. (Looks like things are going to be more than a little busy in all jurisdictions that decide to follow the Sixth Circuit.)
• The search panel covered tons of ground, but talked a good deal about doing creative things with the UI. Udi Manber had this great spiel that sounded like it had tripped off his tongue one or two times before, concerning Google's insistence on the clean and simple: "Google succeeded in reducing the cacophony to a single clear note. It might now be time for chamber music, and eventually perhaps a symphony."
• John Battelle, in his conversation with Mark Benioff, copped to The Industry Standard spending some $6 million on enterprise software back in the day. But he went on to note it was far from a lightweight business model. Now he's involved with BoingBoing, which has twice the readership The Standard had — and four people. "Now that's a lightweight business model."

[P.S.] On reflection, it's probably misleading to characterize BoingBoing as having only a four person "staff." As the direct result of how much people love and trust the site, some of the work is distributed to the hundreds (or more?) who submit links they deem Boing-worthy.