New start-up Factery Labs is launching its first service on Tuesday, a technology called FactRank that can tear through Web pages and collect what it calls "facts." These are bits of information from each source page that Factery Labs' algorithm then organizes into an order of importance.
What this means for you is that developers will soon make use of the technology in third-party search engines or on Web pages to very quickly deliver reading summaries. This cuts out most (or all) of the parts you don't care about, while organizing the bits you might. It also manages to do all this in real time.
The FactRank technology was created by Paul Pedersen, who has a good background in search, including gigs at Inktomi, Google, and Powerset. CNET News met with him and co-founder Sean Gaddis (former Skype and eBay'er) on Monday to get a demo of how the technology works.
In a nutshell it goes like this: FactRank goes through each Web page or source (in whatever index it's searching from) finding semantic tip-offs like declarative sentences. It then cross references each of those against one another, surfacing some of the most relevant ones to the top, as well as factoring in the order of how they appeared. What the user then gets is a tidy list of statements, each of which is sourced and given a level of relevancy based on their appearances in all of the indexed source pages combined.
Whew. Got that? Great, here's an example of what it looks like in motion, as seen on a basic search for Sarah Palin on Twitter:
One of the Factery Labs example applications is a search engine that finds facts from Twitter source results.
(Credit: CNET)Of course, one of the problems with Factery Labs' approach across multiple sources--be it Twitter, or multiple URLs is accuracy; like how can it realize something like The Onion is not the same as the Associated Press?
The short answer is that it can't. Factery Labs can't determine the truth value of what it finds, nor will it ever. "It goes beyond any existing technology. And nobody knows how to do that. I mean, I don't even know how to do that--people don't even know how to do that," Pedersen said. "We are absolutely neutral. We have nothing in the system that has any bias in terms of anything. The only mechanism we maintain is egregious spam, the bad guys."
Along with maintaining a blacklist of these bad sites, FacteryLabs also keeps a list of good sources, or ones that continuously deliver. The more often an author successfully recommends a usable page, the faster they'll accumulate rank among the results.
What you can play with today
As for applying that technology to some consumer products, Factery Labs is launching with a handful of development partners, each of which has already built a tool that makes use of FactRank. The most notable one comes from Sobees which is using the service to add relevancy to Twitter and FriendFeed search results--something that's no small feat.
Users can do a search on Sobees' Silverlight-based Twitter client as usual, but there will now be a FactRank button that can sort through those tweets. It does a quick once-over of all of the results, and will filter the most relevant information to the very top. Included in each of its results is also a shortlist of the facts it finds on every page.
One of the first third-party apps to make use of Factery Labs is Sobees, which is adding its fact finding filters and relevancy tools to Twitter and FriendFeed search.
(Credit: Factery Labs)Advanced users might find more utility in an updated version of Ultimate Info, an extension for Firefox that does a number of things with on-page data. Starting Tuesday, it will let users select links on a page, each of which gets the fact-finding treatment using FactRank.
In our demo, Gaddis used Ultimate Info on the front page of popular site Drudge Report, highlighting about six or seven URLs that were on the page, then running a FactRank query, which brought in its fact results in just a few seconds. As Pedersen explained, users could run something similar on a long article (or several long articles about the same subject), and FactRank's algorithm would be able to provide a fact summary in short order.
Not launching on Tuesday but where the company expects to see the most development is on mobile devices. "Our analysis shows that mobile devices are a prime target for this technology because the latency produces a lot of resistance in the browse experience," said Pedersen. Instead of a user just getting back a link dump of all the URLs it finds, the FactRank engine will go out, process those results, then deliver users with a summary of the best selection of facts--a move that will save the end user from having to wait for any extra pages to load.
If you want to give some of the third party Factery Labs tools a run, you can find them on the company's implementations section. There you'll also find a test search engine that's running off of Twitter's index.
Ask.com's Tomasz Imielinski discusses semantic search as Microsoft's Scott Prevost and Google's Peter Norvig look on.
(Credit: Tom Krazit/CNET News)SAN JOSE, Calif.--If those chasing Google have anything to say about it, search on the Internet is going to become more about a conversation than an exchange of keywords.
Panelists from the four major search engines--Google, Yahoo, Bing, and Ask.com--joined Web search start-ups TrueKnowledge and Hakia at the Semantic Technology Conference to discuss the rise of semantic technology as the engine behind the still nascent Internet search industry. Semantic search, or the idea of divining a user's true intent from how they enter their queries and how Web data is structured, is an unfamiliar concept to the majority of Web surfers who tend to think Internet search is actually pretty good as it is.
It's not, according to Tomasz Imielinski, executive vice president, global search and answers at Ask.com. "Most users don't know how good search can be," he said, drawing an analogy to those who were satisfied with their portable music options until the iPod came along.
The W3C is devoting an entire week to the concept of semantic technology, which involves Web publishers and search engines working together to structure data in a way that can be presented in a more appealing way than the "ten blue links"--a dirty term in the search industry these days--with which most searchers have grown familiar.
Yahoo has been banging this drum for a few years, introducing products like Search Monkey to help Web publishers start organizing their content around semantic standards, said Andrew Tompkins, chief scientist at Yahoo Search. "Today on any major search engine, you'll see structured information about a restaurant," he said, basic things like phone numbers, address, or maybe a link to a map of its location. All of those things require agreement on standards to make it happen.
But semantic search is also about improving the ability of search engines to analyze the meaning of plain text on a page, said Scott Prevost, general manager and director of product at Microsoft's Powerset division. A search engine that knows how to take a query and produce exactly what a person is looking for on the first page of results will prove attractive over time, he said.
The goal of all this work is to make search more intuitive, more like asking a friend or colleague a question, said Riza Berkan, CEO of semantic start-up Hakia. "We believe search is going to move to more conversational techniques," he said.
That's music to Ask.com's ears, of course. The company announced Wednesday that it now has 300 million question and answer pairs in its database that Imielinkski thinks provide context around searches.
But none of this work on semantic technology has done anything to dislodge Google from its position atop the search world, which actually grew a bit stronger over the past month according to ComScore. Google's Peter Norvig acknowledged the benefits of semantic technology and agreed that Yahoo deserves credit for pushing semantic technology along. He drew applause from the several hundred attendees at the panel discussion when he discussed Google's decision to support RDFa semantic standards, announced last month at Searchology.
Still, there's an economic component to this debate that Google isn't quite buying. None of the panelists brought this up Wednesday, but last year Microsoft's Prevost admitted that the desire to make an end-run around Google's dominance of keyword-based search advertising is what has driven semantic technology research, at least to a certain degree. "If people aren't bidding on keywords, and are bidding on concepts, it could completely change the ball game," he said last August at the Search Engine Strategies conference.
To that end, Norvig argued Wednesday that the idea of conversational search is good for people who aren't quite sure what they are looking for, or who don't quite understand a certain topic. But those who do grasp a topic and want a fast answer are much more likely to use keyword searches, he said.
Corrected at 3:49 p.m.: This post originally misstated the title of Ask.com's Tomasz Imielinski. He is executive vice president, global search and answers. Corrected on Friday, 11:35 a.m., clarifying the W3C did not sponsor the conference.
Glue, the popular Firefox extension that lets users discuss content all over the web, is releasing a version of its add-on, built for Internet Explorer, today. This is a big step for Glue for a couple of reasons. The first and most obvious reason is that being compatible with IE expands Glue's potential audience significantly. Net Applications reports that IE currently holds 65.5% of the browser market to Firefox's 22.51%. Being able to reach 88% of the internet browsing population should increase their registered user base of 130,000 significantly.
The other reason why this release is significant is the sheer accomplishment of developing a good, functional IE add-on like this. It took the people at AdaptiveBlue four months of work to bring Glue to Internet Explorer. Instead of taking the cheap way out, they reworked the code for Glue so that 90% of it is the common core that can work on any platform, with the additional 10% being platform specific code. This not only means that the add-on works consistently across both IE and Firefox, but that it will be much easier to develop for other browsers, such as Chrome and Safari, in the future.
If you haven't tried Glue yet, give CNET's initial write-up a read and check it out if you're interested. I'm looking forward to some cool things from these guys in the future.
There is something about the Semantic Web that gets me all excited about the future of the Internet. Services like Glue are making sense of data all across the Web and allowing users to interact with it.
CNET News' Dan Farber has covered the basic functionality of Glue, but to recap, after installing the Glue Firefox extension, when you visit supported sites about movies, music, books, or other included categories, the Glue bar will slide down, giving you the opportunity to give your input on the product.
One of the things Glue is introducing today is the ability to interact with a piece of content and have a discussion across multiple sites. For example, if I visit the Wikipedia page on the film "Slumdog Millionaire" and write a review of it on Glue, my friends see my review when they visit the "Slumdog Millionaire" page on any of the supported sites, including Amazon.com, Fandango, IMDb, Metacritic, Netflix, and many others.
The opinions of your friends on any particular piece of content just appear as you browse. Today, Glue is releasing the latest version of its service, featuring improvements in content recommendation, Facebook Connect integration, and the improvements to conversations noted above.
In this release, Glue has included support for Facebook Connect. This is going to be a big step forward for the service. The main challenge that new users face when signing up for a new social network is finding their friends. Now Glue users can automatically grab their social graph from Facebook and interact with their friends in Glue.
The "connected conversations" feature that I talked about briefly a couple of paragraphs above is probably the most impressive aspect of this release. Having all of your friends' opinions on a particular product, combined so that you can view them, regardless of what site you choose to browse for the content on, is very powerful.
Glue almost completely eliminates the friction involved with getting your friends' opinions on whether you should buy, rent, or watch that movie you've been eying. The Glue bar slides down at just the right moment when you are wondering what your friends think about the movie and happily reports their feedback.
The week's most popular movies on Glue.
Glue has also added some nice recommendation features. Glue now breaks down what content is popular in the various categories within your circle of friends and in the entire Glue population. This should help with some additional content discovery and prove to be interesting in trend monitoring. Maybe the "worldwide top lists" can fill the void left by Facebook Pulse in keeping track of what's hot.
This release of Glue is definitely a solid offering, and I think that the additions of Facebook Connect and connected conversations make it a really killer product. The best part of the product is that it doesn't bug you on a constant basis, but it provides useful information on your friends' opinions when you are looking for it.
Being a fairly painless Firefox Extension install, Glue is worthy of at least a test run. Load up your Facebook friends, browse around, and let us know what you think of Glue.
Through an easier-to-use variation of its SearchMonkey technology, Yahoo search results now can spotlight videos, games, and documents that Web sites label as such with special coding. (Click to enlarge.)
(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET)SUNNYVALE, Calif.--Call it SearchMonkey Lite--an easier way for a Web site to spotlight its videos, games, and documents in Yahoo's search results.
Yahoo has been working to let publishers spotlight their content in its search results through a program called SearchMonkey, but the company has concluded the technology's power comes at the expense of ease of use. Now Yahoo is offering a lightweight way to use SearchMonkey that it hopes will make the service approachable to average Web page creators.
The company posted a blog entry with some basic text that can be tweaked then inserted into Web pages. Doing so will mean Yahoo's Web crawling software will recognize videos, games, and documents, and those data types then can be shown prominently alongside the Web address in Yahoo's search results, said Tom Chi, senior director of product for Yahoo search in an interview here at Yahoo headquarters.
"There's very little code required to engage with this," Chi said of the templates Yahoo is offering. "Adding that extra bit of structure helps those who might be less technically experienced."
Yahoo's Tom Chi
(Credit: Stephen Shankland/CNET)Video results are appearing now, and games and documents should start appearing over the next couple weeks, he said. However, Yahoo will add the results in gradually to ensure its results aren't being gamed or polluted with spam, he added.
Yahoo is trying to make its search more useful and therefore more used, part of its attempt to compete with search leader Google. The more search results are shown, the more opportunities the search provider has to show related advertising.
With this lightweight version of SearchMonkey, search results become more of a destination unto themselves. Right on the search page, the videos can be watched, the games can be played, and the documents can be read. (See screenshot below.)
SearchMonkey relies on Yahoo's search engine finding "structured" data on the Internet--Web sites whose elements have been labeled so computers can know when they've found an address, a video, or other particular types of information. That structured data is a crucial element of what's called the Semantic Web, a years-old idea that computers should be able to understand the meaning and not just the text of Web sites.
"We hope that through programs like this, it'll be possible for publishers to start getting engaged with the Semantic Web," Chi said.
Clicking the video on the Yahoo search page lets it be played directly the search results.
(Credit: screenshot by Stephen Shankland/CNET)
When Yahoo announced BOSS (Build Your Own Search Service) in 2008, the company said it planned to make money from the service. On Wednesday, though, the company announced it's got a new way in mind: charging for high-volume use of the search data.
Yahoo will charge for use of the BOSS API (application programming interface), the service by which other Web sites can extract Yahoo's search data then repurpose it to their hearts' content, according to a blog post by Ashim Chhabra of Yahoo's Search BOSS team. Previously, the company had planned to make money from BOSS by requiring outsiders with high-traffic sites to show Yahoo search ads next to their results.
The new approach allows companies to pursue their own monetization strategies and will help make the API itself more useful by lifting constraints, Chhabra said.
"We're introducing fees for a couple of reasons. First and most importantly, we're hard at work on a number of technologies that will enhance both the functionality and performance of BOSS, and usage fees will help support this development," Chhabra said. "Second, we believe that introducing the proposed pricing structure will improve the ecosystem by optimizing capacity for our serious developers."
BOSS is one part of Yahoo's attempt to make its search more competitive with dominant rival Google, which gained market share over rivals in January, according to Nielsen Online.
One limit that's lifted will be the amount of search results that can be retrieved with one call to the BOSS API; with the fee structure, that limit goes from 50 to 1,000. Yahoo also will offer a service level agreement (SLA) so outsiders can count on BOSS working.
BOSS now can show Web sites' descriptive data spotlighted by Yahoo's SearchMonkey service.
(Credit: Yahoo)The new fees likely will go into effect late in the second quarter, according to the BOSS fee page; those who use the service will pay on the basis of 10-cent units. For example, retrieving the first 100 results for 1,000 searches costs 10 units; developers will get 30 free credits a day, and the rate goes down during off-peak hours.
SearchMonkey injection
Yahoo also announced it's grafting some SearchMonkey technology into BOSS. SearchMonkey can gussy up certain Yahoo search results in cases when the Web sites listed describe their own data with computer-oriented descriptions called microformats such as a restaurant indicating its address. This idea, called the "semantic Web" and long under development, theoretically gives computers a better understanding of what's on Web pages.
The BOSS API now can be set so that search data it retrieves spotlights that structured data, Chhabra said.
BOSS now also shows two other elements: longer 300-character descriptions of each page in search results, up from 170 characters, and some data retrieved by Yahoo's SiteExplorer technology, which can show details such as popular pages within a particular Web site or a list of other Web sites that link to it.
Headup is the latest company to attempt in-browser semantic search. The Firefox-only add-on that, surprisingly enough, uses Microsoft's Silverlight to do its heavy lifting, will scan whatever page you're on and search a cross section of the Web for related news stories, music, videos, and more.
To personalize the results it finds, you can plug in your contacts and accounts from various social services including Twitter and FriendFeed. This will pepper the results with related tidbits from them when applicable. For example, a quick Headup search for "cheeseburger" showed me that one of my FriendFeed buddies had posted a shot of his late-night meal from the weekend. That's a little creepy.
The search itself takes only a few seconds, since results are streamed as they come in. It's very slick looking, but I found the results a little hard to parse through. Its creators have gone with a strange design that loads up a very small preview of any photos or text, which almost always requires clicking to go to the source site.
The design's not a complete showstopper, but I found myself not wanting to go much further than story headlines and photo previews because doing so would have required loading up an extra page. If the interface could be a little simpler to parse, and resemble something like Google Reader or iTunes with a more approachable source list or results, I think I'd dig it.
Another company doing something similar to this is Vysr, whose RoamAbout add-on puts contextual search right on the side of your browser. It's not as social as Headup, but is slightly less intrusive in its presentation.
For the last few years AdaptiveBlue has offered a semantically rich Web application that understands things such as books, movies, and music. Clicking on text, such as a company or movie name, brings up a context-sensitive menu of related links. The company is taking its technology a step further, adding a social dimension and renaming the product, "Glue." Along with Radar Networks' Twine and Powerset's Wikipedia search engine (acquired by Microsoft), Glue offers a compelling glimpse into how the Semantic Web will add a new, powerful level of intelligence to the Internet.
Rather than just connect things to related data and services, it also connects things to people and people to people and their things. For example, when a Glue user visits a site with things the software recognizes, such as a movie, artist, wine book, restaurant, or stock quote, a bar appears at the top of the screen with a list of friends and other people in the Glue network who looked at that object. Users can leave brief comments to share an opinion with others.
Glue allows users in its social network to discover what friends share interests with them without going to a central site.
"Glue works as a contextual filter," said Alex Iskold, founder and CEO of AdaptiveBlue. "We show relevant information from friends about the things they visit. They don't have to sift through lengthy lifestreams. For example, if you have 100 friends in FriendFeed, you are a human filter trying to sift through it and the information is completely out of context. The idea is to get the useful information 'chunked' contextually on the pages you visit. We are not asking people to change their habits."
The people surfaced in the Glue bar could have seen the object, such as a movie title, on a variety of sites. "People look at movies at different times and places, but the core semantic technology can understand the same thing and correlate it. As a movie fan, you just want to know what your friends think. It doesn't matter when or where the user visits things; Glue automatically connects them. There is no Glue destination site--the network is the user's context across the Web," Iskold said.
Glue allows users to add comments and indicate a "like" or favorite.
Glue also taps into existing social networks, such as Facebook and Twitter, to add friends, or to "follow" other people. The Glue Navigator allows users to browse the network of people and things, and what friends have identified as a "like" and what they have to say about objects. Glue can display all the music that a friend has viewed and drill down, offering contextual shortcuts to find out more, such as reviews and shopping links, about things on the Web. Glue remembers only the last 20 last things visited, and the things "liked" or commented upon.
Each user has a profile page that shows likes and the number of followers and who the user is following. "It's a way of cross-pollinating interests. You can see what I am interested in and perhaps it is the same books or wine with which you have an interest," Iskold said. "Glue also allows you to claim pages that represent you, such as a blog, FriendFeed, or Twitter. It's an outlet where people know where to find and connect with you. For example, other Glue users could see what you are up to recently on your personal blog."
Glue impressed investors at RRE Ventures and Union Square Ventures (Series A Lead) enough to fund a $4.5 million series B round recently. The company has a good chance of making it through the meltdown.
In the midst of the financial meltdown and a contentious upcoming election, you might think the U.S. government and taxpayers are just funding wars, bank bailouts, and bridges to nowhere or somewhere. But this is the same government that funded the Internet way back when and is also funding the next generation of technologies that will make the current Internet seem like a Model-T.
Over the last several years, the U.S. government--via DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) grants--has invested hundreds of millions of dollars in PAL, an acronym for "Personalized Assistant that Learns." Smarter software and networks and augmenting human intelligence are useful in times of war and peace.
As part of the PAL project, more than $200 million of DARPA money has been poured into CALO (Cognitive Assistant that Learns and Organizes) over the last five years. CALO has been run out of SRI International with the assistance of 25 research organizations and 400 researchers.
At this point, Siri's management is being secretive about what the company is developing. The elevator pitch goes something like, "Users' online lives are becoming more complicated and getting out of control for mainstream users. What if there was an easy way for normal users (non-power users) to ask the Internet to help them."
According to the Siri PR pitch, the product is "a new interaction paradigm for the consumer Internet experience that applies intelligence at the interface." The company expects to release a beta version of its initial product in the first half of 2009, according to Dag Kittlaus, a former Telenor Mobile and Motorola executive who is a co-founder and CEO of the company.
"We have to be careful at this stage," Kittlaus told me. "We don't like to play these games, but we need to keep a tight lid on what we are specifically doing. We have some original ideas of what the product is going to do, but we don't want to spark ideas among potential competitors." Those competitors would likely be masters of the Internet with large Internet footprints and research prowess like Google, Microsoft, and Yahoo.
Kittlaus did allow that Siri has more than a dozen partners, presumably large, well-established distribution players that can help build a consumer market for Siri's product. Unlike most Web start-ups, Siri has a business model, Kittlaus claimed. "We have good business models, both existing and emerging. We think CPA (cost per action) is the future, and this specific application is good for CPA and we are partnering on that."
He also touted the pedigree of the company's current cadre of 19 employees. "They are mostly engineers from Yahoo, Google, SRI, NASA, and Xerox PARC," he said. The chief architect of the CALO project, Adam Cheyer is a co-founder and vice president of engineering at Siri, and Tom Gruber, a well-known artificial intelligence and semantic Web expert, is a co-founder and CTO.
Cheyer described CALO as superset of what Siri is developing. "The CALO project is building an automated assistant to help manage and improve your life. The technology spans all aspects of interaction--natural language processing, speech recognition, and planning and reasoning capabilities--and interfaces with all kinds of systems, such as email and contacts," he said.
(Credit:
SRI International)
"Learning in the wild is core focus," he continued. "We want it to improve over time and learn from users with no coaching and without changing any code. We are taking the key elements from the project to commercialize it in a form that will delight users. We are not building systems that do things but that learn how to do things."
CALO sounds like a representation of the famous Apple Knowledge Navigator video from 1987.
"Siri is a subset of that concept," Cheyer said. "We have to keep in mind existing user behavior. It will feel like something close to what people use a lot. We will add speech recognition and other features as we go. We don't want to take such a leap that people cannot identify with it. We'll do things similar to but more advanced than what we do now. The longer term vision is the Knowledge Navigator, although it is an early chapter now and it might look different than that."
According to Gruber, intelligence at the interface allows the computers to make recommendations, like a personal assistant:
The interfaces we use to interact with the world's information are getting smarter. Web portals gave us someone else's idea of the content we should see. Then came search engines, which let us tell the system what we want, one query at a time. We are about to see the next wave -- intelligence at the interface -- in which the system knows about us, our information, and our physical environment. With knowledge about our context, an intelligent system can make recommendations and act on our behalf.
(Credit:
Tom Gruber)
Siri may be working on more intelligent Web interfaces that can make inferences based a wide variety of user activities (the "lifestream"), learning over time on its own, and then taking actions on behalf of users. For example, if you are booking travel or looking for a restaurant, Siri would know your preferences and about travel sites or restaurants, integrating data and context from multiple sources to deliver personal assistance. This could be especially useful in mobile scenarios where you don't want to wade through pages of search results or deal with complex interactions.
Tom Gruber: "If we want our technology to have world-changing impact, bring it to the interface: get useful knowledge from all those intelligent people on the Internet give the benefit of this knowledge to everyone. "
(Credit: Tom Gruber)We'll have to wait for next year, if the company stays on schedule, to see whether Siri can really define a new paradigm for experiencing the Web.
Two companies recently pitched me on their semantic engines. These are not search engines, which is what most people think. Rather, they are databases and algorithms that hold the structure of language (in both cases, the English language). At the most basic level semantic engines tell you what's synonymous with what. At the advanced end of the spectrum they know how grammatically similar phrases like "take a seat," "take a stand," and "take a lollipop," mean completely different things.
These engines can be used by search products to greatly improve results. Powerset, now a part of Microsoft, made a big deal of its semantic chops by showing how vaguely worded search queries would return just the results you wanted. Now, it seems, that raw semantic technology is about to become mainstream.
Cognition recently announced its "world's largest semantic map of the English language," sporting more than "10 million semantic connections." The company is rolling the technology into products like CognitionSearch for the Enterprise, which is a knowledge mining tool, as well as an "eDiscovery" product for the legal industry that enables lawyers to "quickly and efficiently find incriminating, smoking gun documents." The company is also applying its technology to a new advertising engine.
The much smaller and newer company, Eeggi, which I was introduced to at Web 2.0 Expo in New York, is also building an engine for discerning meaning. Founder and chief scientist Frank Bandach told me his model was mathematical (his training is as a prime number theorist) and that his engine goes well beyond understanding synonyms. In his demo, he entered the query "Mary kissed John," and showed how traditional word-matching engines picked up pages there were also about John kissing Mary. His system understands English well enough to filter those out as misses.
Bandach says that he's got most of the English language in his system, and that he did English first, "because it's hard. Only Finnish is harder." He's going to work on German next, by feeding it some German dictionaries, which sounds like a science-fiction way to seed a semantic engine, but he said it's enough to get the system going. Bandach says his algorithms are efficient and not, like Powerset's, CPU hogs.
Unlike Cognition, Eeggi is an early-stage project with only four people working on it. It's far too early to tell if the technology is robust and scalable enough to compete with Cognition or Powerset. But I am encouraged to see small companies working on this problem and claiming intellectual breakthroughs. I really would not be surprised to see "meaning engines" become available to Web developers in the same way spelling checkers and grammar engines are now. I have no idea what developers will build with this technology, but I can't wait to see it.
See also: Cycorp.
