Microsoft Patenting Celebrity-Shaped Bing'ing 123
theodp writes "GeekWire reports that Microsoft is seeking a patent on the concept of applying the persona of a celebrity to Internet searches, allowing people to see search results shaped by the personalities and preferences of Hollywood celebrities like Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, Megan Fox, and Jessica Lange. A search for an evening dress using the persona of Jessica Lange, explains Microsoft, would return dresses that reflect the actress's 'style and/or fashion preferences,' including 'color, fit, designer, cut, etc.' Your move, Google."
Lets me guess, Paris Hilton returns.. (Score:5, Funny)
..nothing?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
...let's just call the results 'adult marital aids' and leave it at that.
Re: (Score:1)
As opposed to children's marital aids?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
A search for Paris Hilton automatically opens your e-mail program and fills in your father's e-mail address so you can ask daddy for money.
Searching as Clint Eastwood (Score:3)
[] Do you feel lucky, punk?
Woooooooooow (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
All the time. Don't you watch Hawaii Five-0? There's no other search engine in the world! Just "Bing it!" (and, yes, they actually used the phrase on the show).
Re: (Score:1)
Hawii Five-0 aired from the late 60s till 1980, was Danno some sort of time traveler?
Re:Woooooooooow (Score:4, Funny)
Let me guess, you don't even own a TV?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
...and was brought back on CBS last year. Damn, man, couldn't get cable under that rock, huh?
Re: (Score:2)
It's not like he missed much, from the looks of it.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
You're making fun of somebody for not knowing about a knock off remake of a shitty old TV show, where the cast uses the phrase, "Just Bing it".
I don't know what he's doing under the rock, but I'm pretty sure he should be making fun of you.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, there are two possibilities I can envision:
1) You knew off the top of your head the air dates of Hawaii Five-0.
2) You did a web search to determine those facts, and it didn't convey to you the fact that the show was rebooted last year.
Which is more embarrassing?
Re: (Score:1)
4) You think that remaking a show that went off the air when Nixon was president is a cool thing that's entirely appropriate.
I know which I consider more embarrassing.
Re: (Score:2)
4) You think that remaking a show that went off the air when Nixon was president is a cool thing that's entirely appropriate.
Er, where exactly does Moofie say or even imply that? (Hint; he/she didn't.)
Point (1) made fun of your knowledge of an old TV show, point (2) made fun of the fact that your leet search skills apparently weren't that leet.
Either that was a blatant attempt to smear Moofie via strawman, or you're the type who assumes that anyone who makes a valid criticism of the manner in which you chose to argue a particular point can be automatically assumed to be taking the opposing position to you, not just on that sp
Re: (Score:2)
"Late sixties" doesn't count as a date.
Re: (Score:1)
Cool product placement for a search engine nobody uses on a show nobody watches.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I changed the search settings in IE today in Windows 7 clean install, and I can verify that if you want to change your IE search engine from Bing to anything useful, you have to scroll SIDEWAYS (?!) through pages and pages of junk (specialized search engines that help you find stuff you don't care to find in any case) in order to find a real search engine of any kind--and that's even including things like Yahoo. If you want to find Google, you have to be VERY diligent, or use the tiny "Search" box above th
Re: (Score:2)
Google's move (Score:5, Insightful)
Google's move? I'm pretty sure it'll be a bewildered gaze followed by a light chuckle.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes. This.
Unless Microsoft is getting a April Fool's joke in reeeeeally early, TFA represents one of the most retarded ideas I've heard in a long, long time.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Um, yeah. Isn't it easier to just go to google and type "Jessica Lange dresses" then to go through a whole 'select your celebrity' wizard.
Re: (Score:3)
Or the right side summary bar.
I think Google takes Bing more seriously than people think. I dont blame them since Bing is the only potential competitor.
Re: (Score:2)
There were similar reactions to the first iMac.
bewildered (Score:2)
I read the summary. I've read some of the discussion. Haven't bothered to read TFA. I'm just sitting here, wondering. Would I rather have my searches shaped by the preferences of someone like Paris Hilton, or would I rather be caught blaspheming against Allah in Iran? Tough question. FFS - if there were any "celebrities" that I gave a damn about, I still wouldn't want my searches to reflect their preferences!
Case in point - I happen to like Linus Torvalds. He's in my circle on G+. I've learned a few
Re: (Score:1)
Don't miss out on the fun. Suppose your hits are shaped by Richard Nixon, let your neighborhood know you might be interested in their political skeletons. Or J. Edgar Hoover, lady's dresses and lipstick might make it for you. How about Red Skelton? Every hit a laugh. Osama bin Laden? Mass murder and a harem to boot. Mephistopheles? Learn how to value your soul. George S. Patton? Find your local Tanks-Are-Us store. Jeff Bezos? Learn how to patent the most obvious, insignificant things, say, farts.
Re: (Score:2)
Time for a bit of celebrity reality. They are not whom they seem, they are a fabrication of their publication relations firms and marketing agents requirements.
When let loose free of public relations image guidance, typical ego melt down into drug induced collapse is the typical outcome.
So M$ is trying to patent asking public relations firms and marketing agencies, what you should wear, how you should behave, what you should like, and who you should hate, all based upon fabricated celebrity persona typ
Bung is gimmick based search (Score:1)
Google's move? I'm pretty sure it'll be a bewildered gaze followed by a light chuckle.
Followed by an hour of rolling around on the floor laughing!
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Google's move? I'm pretty sure it'll be a bewildered gaze followed by a light chuckle.
Nah.. It'll be something else that will get a very high level of teen-tween interest, making MS' patent yet another dust-gatherer... waiting to strike. One day..... When you least expect it....
You can't patent concepts. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The only thing that won't stop is summary writers.
Patent lawyers use weasel-words to get around the fact that they're patenting a concept every time.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but figuring out how to correlate a third party's interests into a given search? That definitely seems like something that could (and should) be patentable.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Seems to fail the obvious test. Would people want to be able to search as though they were someone else, like say their wife to see what she would want for Christmas? Hmm, yeah pretty fucking obvious.
How to do that, is a matter of code, and should be copyrighted not patented.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Clever eh !
Now I bet you won't even get the privillage of returning results about top in class rehab centers and body mods but their clothing lines and calognes. Classy.
Re:Microsoft? Innovating on searching??? (Score:4, Funny)
Beats the hell out of copying Google's results.
Soon to be followed by a patent on searching for LOLCat pix. Clearly Microsoft are scraping at the bottom of the barrel with bloody fingers.
Re:Microsoft? Innovating on searching??? (Score:4, Insightful)
Beats the hell out of copying Google's results.
Actually, Bing did bring some new ideas to the table that Google managed to borrow. For a while I used Google for my text searches and Bing for image searches because of extra features that Bing had. Google has all those features now so I stick with Google for everything again.
More importantly for this story, this shows that patents can actually be used properly for good reasons. I have long been a critic of patents, but I think that Microsoft deserves some credit in this case. They have done an excellent job in patenting this concept to ensure that such a stupid idea will never be seen in public again.
It is possible that Bing will implement it, but I think that counts as not being seen in public.
I feel a great disturbance (Score:2)
I feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of celebrity stalkers are crying out in terror and suddenly silenced. I fear something terrible is happening.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Or maybe the big explosion and all the deaths just felt like as if they cried out, when they in fact just died without screaming.
Re: (Score:2)
Search for ... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Sheesh, are you mad? You want more of these "innovative" ideas?
Re: (Score:2)
It's ok, the search won't actually return any results.
It looks like... (Score:2)
* Help me choose my underwear
* No, thanks, I'll continue to use the last week's one."
Re: (Score:1)
If it were slashdot, there would be a Cowboy Neal option: ;-)
* I will go commando
Whatcouldpossiblygowrong? (Score:2)
And you thought "Miserable Failure" Google-bombing was bad...
Re: (Score:2)
Don't you mean sing'ularity? Apparently the apostrophe, which used to be advance warning of an "s", is now doing double duty to inform you that a "g" just went past.
Original Free Thinking (Score:2)
Don Draper: People want to be told what to do so badly that they'll listen to anyone.
Hmm. How would you google that.. (Score:1)
Lets see...
Jessica Lange like evening dresses.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Racing to the bottom makes money (Score:2)
Although the average slashdot reader probably has difficulty imagining anyone dumb enough to want to use this service, I guess every click from those who do must be like pure gold to the advertisers.
Re: (Score:2)
Now that you mention it... The dumber it sounds, the more likely it is to work. I spoke too soon.
MS's animal influenced search (Score:2)
Monkeys- all results are "banana"
Kangaroo- all results are "jumping"
Dog- "Snausages!"
Australia & Drop Bear- "best deals on caskets"
Re: (Score:2)
Monkeys- all results are "banana"
No, with Balmer in charge, some of them are to do with chairs and dancing.
Re: (Score:2)
Can it search for the things a lebbo would like?
Patent on proactively tracking users' behavior? (Score:1)
Idiocracy (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Based on some studies they've done with chimps, it's not just our society, but something deeply ingrained in our DNA, we're just wired that way. See the way Slashdot deals with RMS. There's articles in here about his opinions on things which have nothing at all to do with his areas of expertise or even FOSS. We all want to know about important people, some of us just have different definitions of who is important. Some folks like loud mouthed idiots who look good in a dress or a suit, others like loud mouth
Re: (Score:2)
The second.
My point is that celebrity is in the eye of the beholder, and from a logical point of view, obsessing over RMS makes about as much sense as obsessing over any other celebrity. Yes he has some ability which puts him near the upper range of celebrities, but his opinions aren't really any more worthwhile than mine, which is to say not very worthwhile at all.
I did a search for "thumbs" (Score:1)
I did a Bing search for "thumbs" using the Megan Fox shape, but all I got back was pictures of toes. Must be broken.
Wait, does anyone care? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
That depends on who you define as a celebrity doesn't it.
Internet for dummies, aka Bing users (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
I've got to wonder why Bill Gates put Balmer in charge, to begin with. Could he have picked a worse candidate? I can't help but think that some office accountant who actually does real work on a computer (rather than just imagining how to change everything, and make it "prettier") would be a much better choice.
You mean the people (Score:1)
who hire others to shop for them because they don't even have the basic sense to dress themselves?
win
I wonder what kind of porn Charlie Sheen likes? (Score:2)
A stalker's dream? (Score:1)
Am I the only one who find the ability to search with the "persona" of another person rather disturbing?
And, if you are sick enough in the head to use this service, how can you be sure that any "persona"is accurate? Wouldn't it be skewed by the celeb claiming to like XYZ and then trousering a nice pay-off for the promotion?
Also, I assume that this "persona" is based on what the celeb make publicly available or how they wish to appear in public. But that's not them, that's just a veneer. So will the searc
Litigation scenario (Score:2)
And how do MS disavow any unfortunate search results as not in any way defamatory to the celebrity whose "personality" is being impersonated?
Down with the kids (Score:2)
Miley Cyrus, Taylor Swift, Megan Fox, and ...Jessica Lange?!?!
It's all i hear 15 year olds talking about nowadays, their favourite star, Jessica Lange. And I get sick of having to buy Cary Grant action figures, but I hear next year Douglas Fairbanks Jr. is coming into fashion.
Oh cool! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So now instead of not finding what I want, I can not find what a celebrity wants. Awesome!
In a way, on an abstract level it is sort of cool. That's basically enabling to run searches as someone else, enabling you to see things through another person's eyes. As for myself, I'd consider it interesting to see statistics based customized searches. We already know google uses records form past searches and clicks to determine what to show us in subsequent searches. What if you could, run the search and see results that an average Finn would? Or an average Ethiopian? Or an average Ethiopian woman, wh
A real life metaphor... (Score:2)
Really Microsoft? (Score:1)
Therefore, I predict that it will tie in closely with Facebook, something I also think is dumb, and be a huge market success.
I don't want to live on this planet anymore.
Exactly what we need (Score:2)