RIYA – facial recognition of photos – search?

Riyalogo Miss Rogue is pretty well connected so the riya launch will get picked up everywhere ASAP.  But the short version is that Riya is a facial recognition technology that will allow you to either tag or search existing photos for a particular face.

Example: show me every photo on the net that had Steve Jobs in it in the last 12 months – include Flickr and typepad but exclude blogspot because I am trolling for real trends.

Think about that for a minute.  Could you cross reference searches on google images with Riya data?  Can I see all fundraising events in Hollywood that Sergey attended, if any?  Would that not give me a competitive advantage and a PR strategy opportunity?  I think it would. 

As with all new technology it is amoral, so we as a group of humans will have to come up with some ethical guidelines on how to use the technology.  It will be interesting to see if first it works, and second if it works for us all.

NEW EDIT: Forgive my mind for coming up with this, but doesn’t this open the door to search engine spam via steganography?  Uuuugh, every search for Jessica Alba will lead to a lovely fleshbot post with no recourse except for the nerds who can understand the jpg file format.  Where will this lead?  Again, uuugh, hopefully the programmers at Riya have programmed for security and black-hat-evil-doer-prevention from the start.

Public Relations Links from Research

Working on an article about PR and technology stuff which has led to a PR surfing technology frenzy.  Some links worthy of recording, probably more for myself than anyone else.  From Bayosphere – Dan Gilmore – some snippets that relate to my research but I do strongly encourage reading the entire post to put it in context.

Nicholas Carr – The amorality of Web 2.0

And so all the things that Web 2.0 represents – participation, collectivism, virtual communities, amateurism – become unarguably good things, things to be nurtured and applauded, emblems of progress toward a more enlightened state. But is it really so?

and further down some world saving concepts with the point that we need to consider both sides:

And yet, at its best, the mainstream media is able to do things that are different from – and, yes, more important than – what bloggers can do. Those despised "people in a back room" can fund in-depth reporting and research. They can underwrite projects that can take months or years to reach fruition – or that may fail altogether. They can hire and pay talented people who would not be able to survive as sole proprietors on the Internet. They can employ editors and proofreaders and other unsung protectors of quality work. They can place, with equal weight, opposing ideologies on the same page. Forced to choose between reading blogs and subscribing to, say, the New York Times, the Financial Times, the Atlantic, and the Economist, I will choose the latter. I will take the professionals over the amateurs.

But I don’t want to be forced to make that choice.   

and in closing

Like it or not, Web 2.0, like Web 1.0, is amoral. It’s a set of technologies – a machine, not a Machine – that alters the forms and economics of production and consumption. It doesn’t care whether its consequences are good or bad.

He is stating that web 2.0 tech is like a gun.  It can be used for good or evil.  And aren’t we supposed to hate the sin but love the sinner?  Another take-away is that MSM is really venture capital for reporting – and while we aren’t all VC types, I do recognize the value going public through vc brought to google and hence all of us.

I also spent some time on theNewPR wiki and I find it lacking in relevant content.  There are lists of who to pitch, which from a content perspective makes it more like an AMA wiki than a strategic PR tool.  Arrrgh.  And yes I should go post, but I have to admit that the login is an obstacle, mostly for fear of the "approved" process.  I am not Steve Rubel and don’t pretend to be.  I register all the time for sites, and who hasn’t had a wikipedia entry rolled back, but the approval process is a weird mental process that is currently enough to stop my participation.

Google discussing financial stuff in their blog – frequent question

Blogsm When speaking on web marketing, or blogs, or rss, or podcasting, or SEO, one of the comments that comes up time and again is "well that might work for a small company, but we are a public company and can’t go discussing financial stuff online as that isn’t fair disclosure.

Having asked several lawyers over the years I get vague responses about "well, that law hasn’t really been tested fully yet".  And having suffered through discussions of nexus for web sites and tax law in the past, I can assure you these conversations suck are difficult.

So I find it significant that Google’s chief accountant is clarifying financial results in their blog.  I have no idea what he is saying, but there it is.  So I will get the question again, and I still don’t have a definite answer, but at least I have some ammo.