Microsoft Tests Social Search Waters With 'so.cl' Network 135
benfrog writes "Microsoft just quietly launched so.cl in an experiment to more closely unite web searches and social networking. It's not intended as a stand-alone social network — users can log in with Facebook or Windows Live IDs, and it will share your searches publicly by default. "As students work together, they often search for the same items, and discover new shared interests by sharing links. We see this trend today on many social networks, such as Twitter, where shared links spread virally and amplify popular content. So.cl experiments with this concept by automatically sharing links as you search." They've also (wisely?) put Bing Search at the center of the site."
Facebook is still tops (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
that's why you should surf your porn in a different browser than you normally use. so you don't share it to facebook by accident
Re: (Score:3)
My, albeit limited, experience with MySpace is that it is a completely different animal. It is designed as a simple personal website with extras to allow you to interact with your "fans". FB from the ground up was designed to find other people and interact with them. The wall/profile is more of a way of knowing you got the right Melissa Etheridge before you start throwing your tomatoes.
Re: (Score:2)
My, albeit limited, experience with MySpace is that it is a completely different animal. It is designed as a simple personal website with extras to allow you to interact with your "fans"..
Yep, you pretty much described Facebook.
The differences between MySpace and Facebook? Facebook did a better job of limiting outside spam. Facebook did a better job of limiting annoying style sheets... Facebook pretty much did a better job with everything. But at the heart of the matter MySpace and Facebook provided the same service.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
I keep hearing this comparison of Facebook and Myspace and a prediction that Facebook will suffer the same fate as some other cooler social network catches the fancy of people. I don't believe that. I think Facebook has won the social networking war. I think social networking went through its "evolution" phase and Facebook is the winner. While it is possible that some other social network ousts Facebook, I think it is not very likely. Now, I don't mean Facebook will be the king forever, it will be killed, b
Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... (Score:1)
So, you need to provide Microsoft with your login credentials to do this. Brilliant. Bet that violates Facebook's TOS.
I rank that right up there with trusting Facebook with my gmail password so they can find me new friends ... sorry there skippy, but WTF do you think makes me want to trust you with the password to my account? Sure, I believe you when you tell me you won't save it. Oh, wait, I don't.
I have no idea of why I would want Microsoft to allow Fa
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:1)
So, you need to provide Microsoft with your login credentials to do this. Brilliant. Bet that violates Facebook's TOS.
You have no idea what you're talking about, do you? Facebook Connect goes via Facebook. It's like OpenID. You don't even need to provide your password if you're already logged in.
I have no idea of why I would want Microsoft to allow Facebook to know all of the searches I do on Bing. In fact, I have no idea of who would want this.
Searches from Bing don't count, only from so.cl site. It's made for collaborative searching and discovery.
Re: (Score:2)
Did I know about Facebook Connect? Nope. Do I believe that gives me any more reason to trust in this? Absolutely not.
Then again, I've disabled APIs against my Facebook account ... I don't want every web site I visit to be able to access that information.
That's the last thing I'd want enabled. Otherwise half of the websites you hit would suddenly have access to my information. Fuck
Re: (Score:2)
It's not automatic. Facebook Connect will popup in a new window, it will tell you what information the site will get and then you have a button where you can login using Facebook.
Google has similar stuff [google.com], but for Google accounts.
Re: (Score:1)
It's Slashdot, that's what we do.
In the mean time, you'll forgive me for not giving a shit if someone with a 7 digit ID and a posting history of all of 6 comments wants to impress us by waving his pecker around.
Now run along.
Re: (Score:2)
Way to care about shit that matters. He proved you wrong, so you attack him?
Here, attack me instead. I have the same number of digits as you and quite a posting history.
Re: (Score:2)
My point was instead of acting like a douchebag, he could have simply explained his position.
Instead he went straight to being a dick ... so he's not much better than an AC who trolls, and doesn't have enough presence for me to treat him otherwise.
I'm willing to concede I'm wrong. I'm not as willing to listen to some whiny prick who has barely posted anything if he's going to act like an asshole out of the gate.
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... (Score:4, Informative)
Not your login information, no. You login through Facebook itself (HTTPS) and it uses some sort of identifier system to verify the login to MS. However, it also lets MS access your name and profile information, especially email address (including friends, although those are supposedly not retained). So no, you don't give MS your login information. You do, however, grant them the right to retain all your searches and use all your public information for any purposes whatsoever, so there is that.
And probably your friend's data too... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
So I tried logging in by clicking on the "Windows Live" option. A pop-up window appears listing the access and permissions that Socl will need. Makes me leery so I click "NO".
Brix were shat.
Seriously, which summer intern wrote this site?
Re: (Score:2)
Broken english error message (Score:5, Insightful)
"Open require Javascript, please enable the javascript in your browser and try again"
Sounds like an outsourced job.
Re:Broken english error message (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like an outsourced job.
Have you ever been so far as to wanting the Microsoft needful search? With JavaScript, you will experience the very social!
As modern Internet Explorer browser and functionality such as JavaScript support, download and try requested site again. ...
Yeah. About that... I'll leave NoScript on, thanks. :D
I see Frank is searching for nude girls with meat (Score:5, Insightful)
No.
There are some things about my friends I'd rather not know.
Re: (Score:2)
- 1 Offtopic
Hmmm.
A post about a SEARCH on an article about SHARABLE SEARCHES is "offtopic" how?
Re: (Score:1)
If anyone (Score:2, Funny)
Dear Mr. Microsoft.
Since you already have penetrated my life so fully, I also want you to have access to a list of my friends and their information too. I know you will never use this information in a bad way, or to profit off of me.
Sincerely, The Ignorant Masses
Site attempts to breach browser security (Score:4, Interesting)
Timestamp: 5/22/2012 12:06:38 PM Error: uncaught exception: [Exception... "Security error" code: "1000" nsresult: "0x805303e8 (NS_ERROR_DOM_SECURITY_ERR)" location: "http://www.so.cl/ Line: 185"]
That site has such intrusive code that Firefox 12 with high security settings won't even display it.
Re: (Score:2)
Not really a meaningful result.
For one thing, security in Firefox is a heap of crap and always has been. The browser is excessively paranoid, which is great I install stuff which makes my Firefox is even more paranoid. The difficulty however is that it's very difficult to mark content as trusted. Zones are one of the few things that IE has always had right in terms of security(possibly the only thing), to perform the same thing in Firefox you have to edit a config file and manually grant the specified permi
pr0n, not academic use (Score:4, Insightful)
As students work together, they often search for the same items, and discover new shared interests by sharing links. We see this trend today on many social networks, such as Twitter, where shared links spread virally and amplify popular content.
Yes, the above is true and I'm sure the reader is suppose to think kids are researching academic topics like Dr Martin Luther King Jr's speeches and the metabolic pathways of the TCA cycle, but lets be realistic, its going to be used to search for pr0n. And there's nothing really wrong with that, either.
Do not want! (Score:1)
And in other news... (Score:3)
...tickets for the "How many days does Ballmer have left" sweepstake went on sale today.
Share links? wtf? (Score:5, Insightful)
Seriously, I don't care what my friends are searching, and honestly, knowing some of the shit i search for, I don't want to know what my friends are searching for.
Social Networking is cool, i guess, but seriously, do we fucking need to share everything we do online?
If I find something cool, I can easily tell my friends. I can email them, twitter them, facebook wall it, text them, and probably some other ways also. In fact, it gives me a chance to actually communicate with them, instead them getting some automated message about what I'm doing.
I'm sure all this social stuff is really cool, but really, aren't we going a bit overboard on it? Is this the way to communicate by not actually communicating?
For example:
Joe: "Hey, how is your brother doing, Dave?"
Dave: "According to so.cl, he's got crabs, is looking for a new job, and seems to be interested in Chicks with Dicks."
Joe: "So you haven't actually talked to him lately?"
Dave: "Talk about what? Everything we do is recorded and sent to all my friends, nothing to talk about."
Re: (Score:2)
No doubt. Social isn't always cool. STDs come to mind.
Re: (Score:1)
Seriously, I don't care what my friends are searching, and honestly, knowing some of the shit i search for, I don't want to know what my friends are searching for.
I don't think that's the main purpose of the research. I think the main purpose is to see whether there's a way for people to informally collaborate on things by searching and bundling different content of interest for those things they are collaborating on. That's why they kept it closed for so long. Having said so, I don't think it will work. For one reason, exactly because of your reaction: most people will think that the main purpose is to peek into other people interests by looking at their searches an
RE: "so.cl" (Score:4, Funny)
anybody else first pronounced it in their head as "Suckle"?
Oh boy. (Score:3)
Why? (Score:3)
I have two questions:
1. Why would I want to share my search results with everyone?
and more importantly,
2. Why would I want everyone to share their search results with me?
Another failed group of Slashdot comments (Score:3)
Insert generic "Microsoft sucks" comment.
Seriously guys?
Regardless of whether so.cl succeeds or fails, by having another "giant" enter the social networking arena will drive up innovation.
When Google released Google+, yes we can agree that its kind of stillborn and lacking, but if forced Facebook to innovate and provide additional features. Google+ then also followed suit by making its features better.
I have no doubt that Microsoft is capable of doing a few things better then the rest, so if those things are disruptive to the way the current "standards" deliver social networking, then it will be a win for everyone when social networking improves as a whole.
Lets put it this way, Google, Apple and Facebook are ALL paying close attention. Its the reason why the are billion dollar companies and you drive a used Corolla, they don't just say "Microsoft sucks" and move on, they made something better.
Sure its easy and safe to say that Microsoft does not have a chance to displace Facebook, or even Google+, but this is only a research project and I think a few ideas will most likely trickle their way into Facebook and Google+ and social networking in general. Its interesting to see their take on social networking and foolish to assume they are completely irrelevant.
Re: (Score:3)
Insert generic "Microsoft sucks" comment.
Seriously guys?
Regardless of whether so.cl succeeds or fails, by having another "giant" enter the social networking arena will drive up innovation.
...
Really? Seems to me it's just another example of MS trying to get on a bandwagon once again, since they are always late to the party. And having searches shared with friends isn't innovation, it's fucking creepy.
Re: (Score:1)
Something (Score:2)
Something has to replace Facebook. Not this but something has to. I am sure most Slashdotters would prefer some open/free/libre thing. Where is it?!
Re: (Score:2)
Something has to replace Facebook. Not this but something has to. I am sure most Slashdotters would prefer some open/free/libre thing. Where is it?!
Some people use Google+ (which has a data liberation so you can export all your data if you like, but probably not as open as some would like). There is also "Diaspora*" which is open, but still in development I believe.
If Google did this? (Score:1)
Bing Minus “cut off Facebook’s air sup (Score:5, Funny)
YESLER WAY, Seattle,, Saturday (MSBBC) — Microsoft today stealth-released its new social network, Bing Minus [newstechnica.com], automatically adding every person in the world still using Internet Explorer, such as your mother.
The Bing Minus software was distributed Friday morning in an automatic urgent mandatory critical Windows security update. It will also be available on Windows Phone 7 and BlackBerry.
“Social networking is the new primary focus Microsoft is betting the business on,” said CEO Steve Ballmer, defining “the business” as “my job.” “It’s already banned in China!” he proudly declared, although Chinese contacts deny this. Productivity has also increased in offices containing Bing Minus users.
Bloggers and tweeters are already swapping tips on how not to obtain Bing Minus invitations every time you click on anything whatsoever in IE or Windows itself.
“Facebook is definitely quaking in its boots. Who are users going to want to give all their information to, Facebook or Microsoft? I think the choice is obvious.”
Ballmer looks forward to a bright future for Bing Minus. “Whatever happens,” he said, “it’s going to suck less than Buzz.”
What it Really Is... (Score:2)
Many people seem to be confused that this is some kind of privacy invasion, with Microsoft sharing your search queries with all of your friends.
No. You must specifically log in to so.cl and perform a search. It is only these searches which are made public and (if you allow it) to your social networks.
The site is definitely geared to students and to help them collaborate on search results. It even offers features similar to Pinterest and a video chat room surrounding specific terms.
Re: (Score:2)
. You must specifically log in to so.cl and perform a search. It is only these searches which are made public and (if you allow it) to your social networks.
It doesn't share searches. It shares search results... the search results you tell it to share.
As far as i can tell, this shares search results... and allows video chat... Can't I already do that fairly easily? You know... copy link, paste into facebook wall?
Re: (Score:3)
When the headline is a question, the answer is usually "no."
Paradox! (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
To be henceforth called naroom's paradox! :D
Re: (Score:1, Interesting)
No, but hypothetically speaking yes. One cannot answer hypothetical questions correctly, since they offer no "truth" (the "yes") from which to derive an answer.
The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right. ALL hypothetical questions must be answered hypothetically. The question in class were usually something like "If all cats are dogs and all dogs are horses, are all cats horses?", the hypothetical answer is "yes" but in reality (truth) is no. And I would answer them that way.
Re:Paradox! (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
As far as being less intelligent than anyone else, well, hopefully my ego will manage.
Re:Paradox! (Score:5, Interesting)
That's very stupid. Hypothetical questions can have value, and if you insist on answering them all with "no" you lose that value. Here's an example taken from Albert Einstein; I've modified it somewhat, but the ideas are the same:
If I pursue a beam of light with the velocity c (velocity of light in a vacuum), do I observe such a beam of light as an electromagnetic field at rest though spatially oscillating? Yes, according to the Gallilean transformation, I would. However, there seems to be no such thing, neither on the basis of experience nor according to Maxwell's equations, so I deduced the principle of relativity.
(Original here [pitt.edu])
If you insisted on answering "no" to his question, you'd get the wrong conclusion. Just because you can't get to velocity c doesn't mean the thought experiment is "outside the framework of Truth" (whatever the hell that means). This would all be fine if you simply accepted that an argument can have a truth value independent of its premises and conclusions. The argument "If all cats are dogs and all dogs are horses, all cats are horses" is true. However, the premises are false, so the conclusion does not necessarily follow from the truth of the argument, and in fact in this case the conclusion is false. I could write this more clearly in first order predicate logic if needed.
To be honest, you don't really know what you're talking about, your professors were probably annoyed by your smugness mixed with your stupidity--not the fact that you were right--and you should have been modded down, not up.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, the hypothetical question here is an example of why hypothetical questions are to be answered negatively from the outset. Had it been so, then the answer would have been "no" because (please review above response) there was no proof of the assumptions ;) Thus the "view" is assumed (oscillating EM) is false, as the premise. However by actually DOING the experiments correctly, you would realize that when doing the "view" in reality, the view is not what was expected ... hence ... relativity. Einstei
Re: (Score:2)
Your explanation is repeatedly incoherent--I cannot follow most of it. Parts of your original post were also incoherent as others have pointed out in detail. I'm honestly beginning to suspect you have a mental problem. You also exhibit many of the behaviors of mathematical cranks [wikipedia.org]. Specifically, cranks...
"overestimate their own knowledge and ability, and underestimate that of acknowledged experts."
-- Yup, you've talked about how you were smarter than your professors, and now you've put
Re: (Score:1)
A hypothetical statement with a false antecedent is considered vacuously true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth
Re:Paradox! (Score:5, Insightful)
Sure you can.
Assuming by "truth" you mean something like "accurate statements of external reality", this is not required for a correct response to a hypothetical question.
Uh, yeah. I doubt they hated you for that, since everyone knows that. They might have disliked your failure to understand what answering hypothetically means, though.
No, the answer, period, is yes, whether this is intended as a definition blind hypothetical (so that "cat", "dog", and "horse" are just variable names, not terms with definitions outside the question) or whether its a hypothetical about "cats", "dogs", and "horses" under the usual definitions.
In the former case, the question is equivalent to:
Given p -> q and q -> r, does p -> r? Implication is transitive, the answer is yes.
In the latter case, then the question is "Is the implication ((p -> q) && (q -> r)) -> (p->r) satisfied when p->q, q->r, and p->r are always false." The answer here is also yes.
This clause is incoherent. If you mean people often assume that the premise of a hypothetical question is fact, then, to the extent that that is true, its simply a failure to understand what a hypothetical question is. It has no impact on the correct manner of answering such a question.
Re: (Score:2)
Now you're talking Boolean Math, which IS provable.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right.
They didn't hate you. You weren't interesting enough to be worthy of hatred. They may, however, have been deeply annoyed by you, because you were always taking up class time with your incoherent babbling which you thought was a brilliant refutation of their ideas and everyone else could tell immediately was complete crap.
In general, any tale along the lines of "The Xs hated me because I outsmarted them," where the Xs are any group of authority figures, took place only in the teller's imagination.
Re: (Score:2)
So the A/C above you says they hated me because I was stupid, and you say they didn't hate me at all. Which is it? ;)
And in the mean time, you completely missed my point ...
Re: (Score:3)
You seem to miss what is being asked in these hypotheticals. When the word "if" is used, you are expected to give an answer as if that premise were true. You CAN answer those questions "correctly". For example, heres a hypothetical for you:
If I were to ask you what 2+2 is, and you were to answer 5, would you be wrong?
If you answer no, you will be wrong. There is no situation in which the the answer would be "no", unless there were additional premises not specified (in which case you have changed the hypothetical).
This is important because people often base hypothetical questions as "fact", and thus trap people into thinking the logic of the question is "true" and thus the whole premise is "true" when in fact, it was just a hypothetical question, with a false premise, of which the answer ... by default ... should have been in the negative.
I offer an alternative: That you are NOT smarter than every other p
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is "IF" leads to "false" conclusions, WHEN the premises are not true.
In your example the premises (2+2, 5) are provable. IF the premises are provable then the answer is no longer hypothetical. 2+2 = 4, any other answer is wrong, no hypothesis are needed. ;) However, since I would not answer 2+2=5 under normal conditions, your question's assumption that I would, is false. ;) Thus the hypothetical question is indeed false (misleading). So the answer is "hypothetically speaking, yes, I would be wro
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is "IF" leads to "false" conclusions, WHEN the premises are not true.
No it doesnt. It only does that if you forget that the premises were hypothetical, and forget to evaluate whether they are.
In your example the premises (2+2, 5) are provable.
Thats not the premise. The premise is me asking you whether 2+2 is 5. I have not done so, so the premise is not true, and you therefore are not wrong about that particular thing.
This sort of logic is useful, because in the above example, you could determine the consequences of answering that question with "5" if it were ever asked, without having to resort to trial by error. In more
Re:Paradox! (Score:4, Interesting)
The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right. ALL hypothetical questions must be answered hypothetically. The question in class were usually something like "If all cats are dogs and all dogs are horses, are all cats horses?", the hypothetical answer is "yes" but in reality (truth) is no.
You have just reinvented the subjunctive mood for verbs. Just rewrite your syllogism in the old fashioned English subjunctive mood and see:
"If all cats WERE dogs, and all dogs WERE horses, WOULD all cats BE horses?" Yes, they would be, but they aren't, as you pointed out. A counter-factual "would be" can coexist with a factual "are not". Making hypothetical, but false, statements is one of the classic uses of the subjunctive. The subjunctive makes it clear that you are not asserting a real fact, just a hypothesis.
Re: (Score:2)
No, but hypothetically speaking yes
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Re: (Score:2)
Take your favorite mathematical unsolved problem, call it A.
If A is true, then what follows
If A is false, then what follows
By looking closely at what follows, you can get a sense for whether to pursue the truth of A is true or A is false. All you are doing is, saying if you accept A and B follows from this, and B turns out to be false, then A is false. Of course you are mixing proof theory with model theory, but don't let that stop you.
And you say you took logic a
Re: (Score:2)
Boolean Math I get. :-D My problem lies with false premises being asserted as facts ... which is done all the time as "hypothetical questions"
Re: (Score:2)
Actually he's not ignoring the "if," as that's what makes it a hypothetical question in the first place.
Re: (Score:1)
Yes.
If your question was a headline, the answer would be "no".
Also, if the moon is made of green cheese, then pigs would fly.
And if I am Albert Einstein, then 2+2 = 5.
All true statements. Lrn2 classical Boolean algebra.
F IMP __ = T
Re: (Score:1)
Now, for a more interesting question:
IFF this sentence was a headline, would the answer be "no"?
Re: (Score:2)
Oh. Yes he did. Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mainstream tech coverage is barely above tabloids [imgur.com].
I came here to say "that's why independent tech podcasts are so important" but then I realized my own tech podcast was completely and utterly irrelevant :(
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Photosynth lives on as a popular iOS app and on the web.
This is a research project, nothing like Google Wave or even Ping. Not everything that is researched needs to be a successful product.
Also, note to posters who keep calling bonch a MS shill, he's nothing like one. He's actually a anti-MS, anti-Google, pro-Apple shill.
Re: (Score:3)
Google has nothing of the sort, except its API [google.com], which allows only 100 queries per day per account, unless you pay at a rate of $5 per 1000 queries. That's well within most research budgets, and certainly within the needs of most individuals.
Re: (Score:2)
And how would you create something like his so.cl site or DuckDuckGo with that kind of rate?
The preferred method is to call (or email) google and ask for free access for your project. Or you could apply to the summer of code [google.com] project and see if you can get google to pay you.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft (Score:4, Informative)
Completely free, up to 5000 per month, which is still far under anything like DuckDuckGo's needs. For comparison, Google's 100-per-day is 3000 free queries per month. Microsoft's free offering is slightly less ridiculously limited than Google, but neither is usable for a successful site. If your site is popular, you're going to have to pay somebody.
Re: (Score:3)
Ridiculously limited?
So how much free shit should you be given before it moves up to just limited.
Seems to me that they are both attempting to offer people who want to try out cool little things all the access they would ever need for free.
But if you want them to spend money on power and cooling for 1000 requests per day so that you can make money on their dime they charge for that.
I think that this is a completely fair stance for both companies to take.
Re: (Score:2)
I meant in the context of a popular site, which will get a few tens of thousands of hits a month... 3000/month is ridiculously more than what my little IRC bot needs, which usually gets about 5 queries a day.
Re: (Score:2)
What you think is ridiculous then is that Google and Microsoft do not spend their time and money so that some other corporation can make money off of them?
The fact is that they provide a service to us all. On top of that they allow all types of access to their API for people with small projects and cool little ideas.
When things get big and start making money they begin to get charged.
I think that your problem with that is ridiculous.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems either you're trolling badly, or just misunderstand me.
Here's my viewpoint, with all sarcasm and attempts at wit removed:
Google and Microsoft provide a service for sale, and it's absolutely kindhearted and nice of them to offer some usage for free, so small projects can use their massive resources. I think that Google in particular, by basing a significant part of its business model on "give stuff away for free, and sell to the big users," has vastly improved the ability for individual developers t
Re: (Score:2)
Ok then. :)
Re: (Score:1)
NBC News isn't any better:
Too Hot To Work at a Lingerie Shop? (No I'm just too old.)
http://lifeinc.today.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2012/05/22/11812107-too-hot-to-work-at-a-lingerie-shop?lite [msn.com]
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
WTF!?!?
If the blonde chick in the article picture is the one asking the question, I think we can all easily answer no!!.
She's too old, ugly face and pudgy to be 'too hot' for anything...especially lingerie. Unless said lingerie was for heavy set women...and even with that...she's not what anyone would say was "hot" upon first glance at her.....ugh
Re: (Score:3)
I know its MS, but is there really any such thing as bad research? Barring obviously nazi experimentation and whatnot. Maybe it will fail, maybe it will bring something new to the table, maybe it will inspire someone to do something completely different, even if it does fail.
Re: (Score:3)
It is the privacy side of things that are worrisome I think. Social search sounds great until you forget it is broadcasting and search for something embarrassing.
Re: (Score:3)
Oh for example in Canada a murder trial just finished and one of the pieces of evidence (that were thrown out on technical grounds) was that the suspect has searched for kiddy rape/porn. Guy admits to being guilty I think (argument was just whether or not he or his girlfriend was the one that came up with the idea and used the hammer), but still say he was innocent but a pervert. Sure get him on the kiddy porn but I'm sure he'd wish they couldn't even find it in the first place since it makes him look like
Re: (Score:2)
Really...I mean, would you want to seriously be broadcasting all your pr0n searches!?!?
Re: (Score:2)
Gay antelope sticking head up a two headed gerbil, crap wrong search engine. They'll be some questions from my LinkedIn connections tomorrow.
Re: (Score:2)
Microsoft Research [microsoft.com] does some pretty cool stuff...
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, there's something to be said of Microsoft accusing google of being a "monopoly" and abusing, search, etc when microsoft is doing the *same* thing.
Not that it's mentioned anywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, there's something to be said of Microsoft accusing google of being a "monopoly" and abusing, search, etc when microsoft is doing the *same* thing.
Not that it's mentioned anywhere.
What? I know you like to shit on Microsoft in every comment but what are you even blathering about? The integration with Bing search? You think Google will allow integration with Google search?
Re: (Score:2)
Man, you don't keep up with MS developments, do ya. This social search thing they unveiled and the "search neutrality" rheotoric comes exclusively from Microsoft and google competitors.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, that's kind of the point. Research projects are intended to be shut down, and their results used in real projects later down the line.
That's the entire purpose of Microsoft Research, unlike Wave or Buzz, which are actual failed commercial products.
Re: (Score:1)
So what?
Dude, at least Microsoft is still doing some research, they're not trying to market unfinished products disguised as research.
They are spending money in a lot of areas that will end up in nothing as research should do instead of throwing money in the latest, irrelevant, web-scale-ready, cool, social-featured site that will need to have 200% ROI in one year.
This is the difference between the ephemeral dreams in the valley and a company forward thinking for the long term.
Try to understand a little bit
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Now if they could just fix their crap software. All my XP machines at home are stuck in update loops for 3 updates.
lol @ you expecting Microsoft to address software issues in a decade-old operating system. Also, lol @ you for having more than one XP machine (or at this point, more than zero) at home.
To be fair, my relative's brand new Toshiba notebook w/ Win7 has such update error loop problems. User error? Nope, I restored to factory default and did nothing but update, several fail, then it goes into an update loop. I thought it was due to OEM crapware, so after haggling on the phone with support about giving us a clean OS (which they couldn't do), we bought a very expensive version of Win7 (Note: we already have a license w/ the PC purchase). Fresh install, same issue. After a certain update it