<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>louisgray.com - Latest Comments in http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://louisgray.disqus.com/</link><description>A Silicon Valley Blog for Early Adopters and Tech Geeks</description><atom:link href="https://louisgray.disqus.com/thread_455/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:33:31 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-8075836</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good analysis..It will be interesting to see what new social networks are spawned or created over the next two years.  Some may be out there and transform into something new that meets our needs.  Will be cool.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ken Skiba</dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 11 Apr 2009 05:33:31 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6900142</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Now I can see why Eric Schmidt is a little miffed at Twitter.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;One thing that would be cool is if the "Nifty Queries" were relevant to the search keywords (I don't see the connection in this screen shot). For example, "Top Chef" would kick off searches related to food or cooking.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">John Haydon</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 09:16:59 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6886807</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Instead of saying featured users they should just say users that pay them the most money.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Mike Elliott</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 20:38:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6884553</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I was included in the trial and so have quickly adjusted to the integration.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Though, I'm mostly app based (various) and so generally use the Search there anywhere.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I'm not sure I agree that this really gives us real answers to what the monetisation plans are, I'm still more inline with the recent hype up and down around some comments from Biz Stone.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;e.g.:  &lt;a href="http://www.marketingvox.com/biz-stone-twitter-to-charge-brands-for-use-043130/" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.marketingvox.com/biz-stone-twitter-to-charge-brands-for-use-043130/"&gt;http://www.marketingvox.com...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Though, I still feel this comment on RWW is the best about what monetisation plans are:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/twitter_may_have_business_model.php#comment-123177" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/twitter_may_have_business_model.php#comment-123177"&gt;http://www.readwriteweb.com...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">simonbaptist</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:50:19 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6882412</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks Hutch :-)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Eric Berlin</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:18:52 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6879378</link><description>&lt;p&gt;BTW Louis - Eric's FriendFeed link above isn't right. He's "ebrage" here. &lt;a href="http://friendfeed.com/ebrage" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://friendfeed.com/ebrage"&gt;http://friendfeed.com/ebrage&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Hutch Carpenter</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:17:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6878958</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Louis - was looking for that myself - thanks&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">andy brudtkuhl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:15:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6878957</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Ken, I use (and recommend) FF2Disqus, which pushes FriendFeed comments to the Disqus thread. &lt;a href="https://ff2disqus.appspot.com" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="https://ff2disqus.appspot.com"&gt;https://ff2disqus.appspot.com&lt;/a&gt; At this point, it goes to the FriendFeed profile, and not your Disqus profile. I am unsure if plans are to unify the two.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:14:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6874822</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Just read through Fred's piece and responded over there. My overall takeaway is that I stand behind this piece but will be more conscious of reaching out to people on the web for reaction and perspective going forward. &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Eric Berlin</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 12:36:53 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6874044</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Thanks for the comments Fred, and thanks Louis. Yes, looking back I don't think I could have / should have done anything differently with this piece. You'll note I carefully noted that this is a direction that Twitter *might* be going in, and that in fact this was probably not the final design / UI that will eventually be deployed.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I think the fact that you have ties to Twitter, and chose to present a new look search page to signal how Twitter will continue to provide value for users, important partners, and (presumably) advertisers is, in itself, newsworthy. :-)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Eric Berlin</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 12:17:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6873505</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Louis: Speaking of out of context, I notice my comment above [which I made on FriendFeed] was pulled into Disqus as a comment on your blog. What system are you using to do that, and do you know if there's something I can do so that those comments are properly attributed to my Disqus account rather than some unclaimed FriendFeed profile? Alternatively, is there a way for me to turn it off?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ken Sheppardson</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:55:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6873504</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Good point Ken. It's the problem with the accepted wisdom about PowerPoints that they need to be minimalist. That doesn't translate well to SlideShare. No one is narrating the SlideShare for the reader. SlideShares really need to stand on their own, forget the 10-20-30 approach espoused by Guy Kawasaki.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Hutch Carpenter</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:49:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6873090</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Suggestion: The content you publish needs to speak for itself. Fred writes "[A] phone call (or even an email) from these bloggers would have clarified why I was showing that slide and what it means.." Does he honestly expect that anybody who is going to interpret what he published (i.e. his slides) is going to get in touch with him first? Is that realistic? How in the world does it scale? If the slides that accompany your presentation don't make sense out of context, don't publish them out of context.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Ken Sheppardson</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:37:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6872730</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Taking this away from the drama between you, Fred, etc - let's get back to speculation (that's more fun than blogging drama)&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I love the idea of Twitter adopting an AdWords style recommendation engine. They have talked about "charging business" to use the platform. Well this would be a great way to do so - that benefits both the user and the advertiser. If businesses could bid on keywords to have their account contextually "featured" on a user profile screen - that's a great way to make money while still adding value to both parties.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">abrudtkuhl</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:32:12 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6872700</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Robert, thanks for linking to Fred. I responded on his site and mine. Absolutely respect his position.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:24:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6872398</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Fred, thanks for your comments here and on your blog as well:&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Suggestion: Talk To The Source&lt;br&gt;&lt;a href="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/03/suggestion-talk-to-the-source.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/03/suggestion-talk-to-the-source.html"&gt;http://www.avc.com/a_vc/200...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;As I commented on the blog, there is no question that speculation around Twitter is running high. As you are a trusted advisor to the company, it can be easy to jump to the logical conclusion that Eric and others reached. The UI displayed in this slide clearly differs from Twitter's current model, and many are eager to see what the company is up to next. Sometimes, our guesses will be wrong.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:20:50 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6872407</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Responded both here and on his site. Thanks for the note.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:20:09 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6870388</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Um, Fred Wilson has a bone to pick with this blog. &lt;a href="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/03/suggestion-talk-to-the-source.html" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.avc.com/a_vc/2009/03/suggestion-talk-to-the-source.html"&gt;http://www.avc.com/a_vc/200...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Robert Scoble</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:46:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6869745</link><description>&lt;p&gt;great post Eric. On a retweet i accidentally wrote that the article was from Louis Gray, sorry&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Peter Efland</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:43:00 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6867975</link><description>&lt;p&gt;One of the main missing features on Twitter is a "real" search engine which can show you results according to a rank associated to users. If I'm searching for "nokia 5800 phone" maybe I don't need the last tweets only but: 1) I prefer tweets where there is a link 2) I don't care how old are them, so I don't care whether those are realtime or not.&lt;br&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">luca filigheddu</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 08:01:55 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6866940</link><description>&lt;p&gt;the "we" in where we are going is aimed at the television business as this talk was for a private group of TV execs. and i was showing that tv shows generate a lot of chatter on twitter. i did not intentionally show them the new twitter search results page that i, and a lot of others, am testing and will roll out to everyone soon.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;so where we are going in no way applies to twitter. but i think you've made some good points here anyway.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;fred&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">fredwilson</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 06:30:42 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6862579</link><description>&lt;p&gt;And skeptics said Twitter did not have a business model, the model has always been there, now it more clearly being realised. I always believed this was the gameplan.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Twitter users are all helping to create a powerful and more robust search solution. We get to tag our own information categories, Q&amp;amp;A's,  that we want to refer back to through (#hastags), automatically defining the search behaviour of real users. We choose who we want to connect with and filter out those we choose not to interact with (robot users) . At the end of the day every person we assign as a friend we are defining social groupings and this make the community a rich dimension in a social environment.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;What other service on the internet allows the end user to fully interacting with 'search index'. All Twitter users on a daily basis, by the minute are creating valuable usable information.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Google search model is too prescribed and rigid. User are expected to search through reams of pages to find information that is sometimes hit/miss, the best search results ranked highest on the page through a paid SEO, and even it may not be relevant. From a business experience having used SEO - there are no guarantees that the a click is converted in to a new customer.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Twitter has the commonsense approach, real-time collaboration: they ask the user what they want, and the user shows them what they need (win/win) &lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">JulieWilliams</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 04:47:56 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html</title><link>http://blog.louisgray.com/2009/03/future-of-twitter-integrated-search.html#comment-6862097</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Post by Eric Berlin: &lt;a href="http://www.friendfeed.com/ericberlin" rel="nofollow noopener" target="_blank" title="http://www.friendfeed.com/ericberlin"&gt;http://www.friendfeed.com/e...&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Louis Gray</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 03:37:00 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>