Ray Kurzweil famously talks about the accelerating rate of technology change on an exponential basis.
The Law of Accelerating Returns
"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense “intuitive linear” view. So we won’t experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century — it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today’s rate). The “returns,” such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There’s even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth."
One implication of this is that it is easier than ever for the disrupters themselves to be disrupted. For the adoption cycle of new and disruptive technologies is becoming more and more and more accelerated and compressed.
Don't believe it? Look at Mobile. Facebook, for example, long considered a frontrunner in innovation is, in short order, now on the defensive in Mobile. Facebook is transitioning, at least in mobile, from primarily a build to a buy company - most recently and famously spending $19 billion for WhatsApp, a company that Facebook may or may not be able to monetize, depending upon who you ask.
And a statement that seemed utterly laughable just months ago. Utterly laughable. Now doesn't seem quite so.
Namely, that Facebook could die:
How Facebook Could Be Killed By Mobile (and what Kara Swisher understands better than perhaps the rest of the world)
Die as into oblivion. Cease to be anymore.
Grow or die has transitioned into innovate or die, and where this proves impossible, into buy or die.
One consequence of this has become, almost overnight as well, that "moon shots" have become the new normal.
Technology Convergence - How VC's and Larry Page are "Going Big or Going Home"
The Future of Search
Remember the old truism that change is famously overestimated in the short term, but underestimated in the long term. Well, the long term is approaching for search now. And the tipping point could be a lot quicker, and a lot more disruptive, than people think.
My thinking was stimulated on this topic again today by reading this post
Hey Google, A Search War Is About To Explode
Here are a few quotes from that post to set the stage for the current discussion.
"It seems rather clear that the evolution of search is such that the traditional search engine means less and less, as social networks continue to grow. Sure, Google may continue to dominate the comScore rankings well into the future, but if those rankings don't include a gigantic portion of another sort of search- social, then what's the point?...
And now, just a few weeks ago, Zuckerberg stated that Facebook will compete directly against Google in search. In 2014.
Google knows this, and the late-to-the-game Google+ social platform is proof that Google is worried. Social search is eating into standard search, and it makes sense: A Facebook user who wants to know what people think about a new Italian eatery in his city, the contact info for a reliable locksmith, or whether or not Kanye West's new album is worth buying- these are all things that would have been typed into a traditional search engine in the past...
I'd argue that the one thing that Twitter has over Facebook's head is global reach, at the cost of privacy. What this means is that a Facebook user might dip into his or her personal network of 750 Facebook friends and find information, or perhaps join a public Facebook group with another 2000 members, and get information there. But Twitter has no such limits. A user can simply Tweet what he is looking for, and unless the Tweet is protected, is now open for the world to see and comment on. Twitter is essentially a crowd sourcing search engine...
I pointed out the surreptitious Siri strategy here. But what really caught my eye was Apple's acquisition of Topsy, which is a Twitter search and analytics company.
After taking a look at Topsy, I realized immediately, that simply put, it is a new age search engine. "New age" meaning it searches Twitter, a huge bank of (social) data. On some level, Topsy is equivalent to Facebook's Graph search, but the difference is that because Twitter is a public platform, Topsy can operate independently from Twitter, and therefore allow a company like Apple to spread its tentacles throughout Twitter. And since Twitter is the only true social media competitor to Facebook (not including Pinterest), acquiring Topsy was an ingenious move by Apple to gain a hold in the social media world, which, as I argued above, is really the search world."
There are many important ramifications of the above, which could be discussed for days and still just scratch the surface.
But here's one: Microsoft and Yahoo!, Google's two closest search competitors by far, seem to be competing in search by today's rules.
While Facebook, Twitter, Apple and Amazon (you have to add Amazon, they know everything about what you want - at a minimum from a product perspective) are playing tomorrow's search game.
Today's search game vs. tomorrow's search game.
(of course we could also get into the notions of personal assistant search, voice command search, wearable search or any of a number of additional hypothesized notions in regard to the future of search).
And the Envelope Please
The future winner of search is..................
Google - but not Google.
The future of search may be (get ready to be surprised by something you already suspected might be true but didn't realize)
The future of search may be...................
YouTube.
I read somewhere that a healthy percentage of the younger set are using YouTube as their default search engine rather than Google, Bing or Yahoo!.
This makes sense to me. I am increasingly using YouTube as a default search engine as well. In many cases, video answers are proving better than text answers to the questions that I am asking. Which means that YouTube is a better search engine, for me, in these cases, than Google.
And this is happening more and more.
And here's the money idea:
If YouTube were organized as a search engine as well as Google, people might drop Google overnight. If you could get search results organized on YouTube as integrated and thorough as you can on Google, that could be a game changer.
Of course, Google (via YouTube) would be putting Google out of business, to a degree at least, if it did that.
Cannibalization (marketing)
I realize that Google results already include YouTube listings, and that another company may come up with their own hybrid model (or something completely different).
The Sound of One Hand Clapping
Google, Facebook, Amazon and the other behemoths are looking more and more like each other every day. They compete in many major markets, and the distinctions between them (the companies and sometimes also the markets) are blurring.
Search in the future may exist across many different types of activities. This may occur to the extent that the notion of search as something distinct loses some or all of its meaning.
If that ever occurs, then search may become everything, and/or nothing at all.
The Law of Accelerating Returns
"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense “intuitive linear” view. So we won’t experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century — it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today’s rate). The “returns,” such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There’s even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth."
One implication of this is that it is easier than ever for the disrupters themselves to be disrupted. For the adoption cycle of new and disruptive technologies is becoming more and more and more accelerated and compressed.
Don't believe it? Look at Mobile. Facebook, for example, long considered a frontrunner in innovation is, in short order, now on the defensive in Mobile. Facebook is transitioning, at least in mobile, from primarily a build to a buy company - most recently and famously spending $19 billion for WhatsApp, a company that Facebook may or may not be able to monetize, depending upon who you ask.
And a statement that seemed utterly laughable just months ago. Utterly laughable. Now doesn't seem quite so.
Namely, that Facebook could die:
How Facebook Could Be Killed By Mobile (and what Kara Swisher understands better than perhaps the rest of the world)
Die as into oblivion. Cease to be anymore.
Grow or die has transitioned into innovate or die, and where this proves impossible, into buy or die.
One consequence of this has become, almost overnight as well, that "moon shots" have become the new normal.
Technology Convergence - How VC's and Larry Page are "Going Big or Going Home"
The Future of Search
Remember the old truism that change is famously overestimated in the short term, but underestimated in the long term. Well, the long term is approaching for search now. And the tipping point could be a lot quicker, and a lot more disruptive, than people think.
My thinking was stimulated on this topic again today by reading this post
Hey Google, A Search War Is About To Explode
Here are a few quotes from that post to set the stage for the current discussion.
"It seems rather clear that the evolution of search is such that the traditional search engine means less and less, as social networks continue to grow. Sure, Google may continue to dominate the comScore rankings well into the future, but if those rankings don't include a gigantic portion of another sort of search- social, then what's the point?...
And now, just a few weeks ago, Zuckerberg stated that Facebook will compete directly against Google in search. In 2014.
Google knows this, and the late-to-the-game Google+ social platform is proof that Google is worried. Social search is eating into standard search, and it makes sense: A Facebook user who wants to know what people think about a new Italian eatery in his city, the contact info for a reliable locksmith, or whether or not Kanye West's new album is worth buying- these are all things that would have been typed into a traditional search engine in the past...
I'd argue that the one thing that Twitter has over Facebook's head is global reach, at the cost of privacy. What this means is that a Facebook user might dip into his or her personal network of 750 Facebook friends and find information, or perhaps join a public Facebook group with another 2000 members, and get information there. But Twitter has no such limits. A user can simply Tweet what he is looking for, and unless the Tweet is protected, is now open for the world to see and comment on. Twitter is essentially a crowd sourcing search engine...
I pointed out the surreptitious Siri strategy here. But what really caught my eye was Apple's acquisition of Topsy, which is a Twitter search and analytics company.
After taking a look at Topsy, I realized immediately, that simply put, it is a new age search engine. "New age" meaning it searches Twitter, a huge bank of (social) data. On some level, Topsy is equivalent to Facebook's Graph search, but the difference is that because Twitter is a public platform, Topsy can operate independently from Twitter, and therefore allow a company like Apple to spread its tentacles throughout Twitter. And since Twitter is the only true social media competitor to Facebook (not including Pinterest), acquiring Topsy was an ingenious move by Apple to gain a hold in the social media world, which, as I argued above, is really the search world."
There are many important ramifications of the above, which could be discussed for days and still just scratch the surface.
But here's one: Microsoft and Yahoo!, Google's two closest search competitors by far, seem to be competing in search by today's rules.
While Facebook, Twitter, Apple and Amazon (you have to add Amazon, they know everything about what you want - at a minimum from a product perspective) are playing tomorrow's search game.
Today's search game vs. tomorrow's search game.
(of course we could also get into the notions of personal assistant search, voice command search, wearable search or any of a number of additional hypothesized notions in regard to the future of search).
And the Envelope Please
The future winner of search is..................
Google - but not Google.
The future of search may be (get ready to be surprised by something you already suspected might be true but didn't realize)
The future of search may be...................
YouTube.
I read somewhere that a healthy percentage of the younger set are using YouTube as their default search engine rather than Google, Bing or Yahoo!.
This makes sense to me. I am increasingly using YouTube as a default search engine as well. In many cases, video answers are proving better than text answers to the questions that I am asking. Which means that YouTube is a better search engine, for me, in these cases, than Google.
And this is happening more and more.
And here's the money idea:
If YouTube were organized as a search engine as well as Google, people might drop Google overnight. If you could get search results organized on YouTube as integrated and thorough as you can on Google, that could be a game changer.
Of course, Google (via YouTube) would be putting Google out of business, to a degree at least, if it did that.
Cannibalization (marketing)
I realize that Google results already include YouTube listings, and that another company may come up with their own hybrid model (or something completely different).
The Sound of One Hand Clapping
Google, Facebook, Amazon and the other behemoths are looking more and more like each other every day. They compete in many major markets, and the distinctions between them (the companies and sometimes also the markets) are blurring.
Search in the future may exist across many different types of activities. This may occur to the extent that the notion of search as something distinct loses some or all of its meaning.
If that ever occurs, then search may become everything, and/or nothing at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment