Microsoft Tests Social Search Waters With 'so.cl' Network

Another failed social project from Microsoft by bonch · 2012-05-22 06:53 · Score: -1, Flamebait

Another go-nowhere project from Microsoft's social research group Fuse Labs, following in the footsteps of Live Labs, a previous group that disbanded in 2010. Anyone remember Pivot? Deepfish? Listas? Photosynth? And about 10 other discontinued products.

We all know this will be swept under the rug and forgotten faster than you can say "Google Wave", but it's amusing seeing Betteridge's Law of Headlines at play in the coverage, such as this gem from Fox News: "Is this the next Facebook? Microsoft unveils so.cl social network" The best part is that the article spends its first six paragraphs definitely answering its own headline with a no. Mainstream tech coverage is barely above tabloids.

Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Fwipp · 2012-05-22 06:58 · Score: 2

When the headline is a question, the answer is usually "no."
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by LordKaT · 2012-05-22 07:01 · Score: 1

Mainstream tech coverage is barely above tabloids.
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:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:05 · Score: 0

Yes, that's Betteridge's Law of Headlines, which he linked.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by recoiledsnake · 2012-05-22 07:06 · Score: 2

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.

--
This space for rent.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by cpu6502 · 2012-05-22 07:08 · Score: 0

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

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Intrepid+imaginaut · 2012-05-22 07:14 · Score: 2

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:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Big+Sausage+Festival · 2012-05-22 07:15 · Score: -1, Troll

What I find great about Microsoft is that they actually provide open public api to their search engine. It allows people and researchers to do stuff like this. It even allows new search engines. Google has nothing of the sort - in fact they block your access to their servers just after a few requests if you try to scrape the search results automatically.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by poetmatt · 2012-05-22 07:17 · Score: 1

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:Another failed social project from Microsoft by recoiledsnake · 2012-05-22 07:23 · Score: 1

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?

--
This space for rent.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by ILongForDarkness · 2012-05-22 07:25 · Score: 2

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:Another failed social project from Microsoft by man_of_mr_e · 2012-05-22 07:29 · Score: 1

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.

--
If you need web hosting, you could do worse than here
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by ILongForDarkness · 2012-05-22 07:30 · Score: 2

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 a likely candidate for the murder as well. Social search just adds another layer of potential screw ups leaving incriminating evidence around.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Sarten-X · 2012-05-22 07:31 · Score: 2

Google has nothing of the sort, except its API, 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.

--
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Big+Sausage+Festival · 2012-05-22 07:38 · Score: 0

And how would you create something like his so.cl site or DuckDuckGo with that kind of rate? You'd be burning money really, really fast. Microsoft allows completely free access to the API.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Local+ID10T · 2012-05-22 07:50 · Score: 1

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 project and see if you can get google to pay you.

--
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by cayenne8 · 2012-05-22 07:50 · Score: 1, Insightful

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

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!!

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by cayenne8 · 2012-05-22 07:51 · Score: 1

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.
Really...I mean, would you want to seriously be broadcasting all your pr0n searches!?!?

--
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Local+ID10T · 2012-05-22 07:53 · Score: 1

Microsoft Research does some pretty cool stuff...

--
"You want to know how to help your kids? Leave them the fuck alone." -George Carlin
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Sarten-X · 2012-05-22 08:04 · Score: 3, 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.

--
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:08 · Score: 0

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.
You know, I see constantly that Bonch is a "pro-Apple shill" yet never actually see any pro-Apple shill posts by him. The only remotely pro-Apple posts I could find in his post history are some recent ones talking about the Apple developer program. He just sounds like some Apple developer who posts on Slashdot, and that pisses off the Linux fans, I guess? I don't get it.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Fwipp · 2012-05-22 08:20 · Score: 1

Oh. Yes he did. Clearly I need to work on my reading comprehension.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by orthancstone · 2012-05-22 08:27 · Score: 1

So your irrelevant podcast is on the same level as mainstream media? Hey, at least you've made it!
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Dragonslicer · 2012-05-22 09:48 · Score: 1

I believe it's also called Punctuation Punditry.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 09:49 · 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 more about the project instead of stopping at the headline and making immediately comparisons with an endless list of things. Eventually, you'll realize what is all about.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 09:59 · Score: 0

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.
That's probably the reason it will fail in the end, because people will forget or simply don't get it, but I guess that's simply part of the research project (testing it).
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Dishevel · 2012-05-22 10:12 · Score: 2

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.

--
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by SadBob · 2012-05-22 10:13 · Score: 0

Well that's mostly because all western women are ugly, big and fat. Japanese and Koreans, on the other hand...

There's a reason why Mark Zuzgerberg chose Chinese wife.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 11:38 · Score: 0

Dude, at least Microsoft is still doing some research, they're not trying to market unfinished products disguised as research.
They save that for their OS...
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by ILongForDarkness · 2012-05-22 14:26 · Score: 1

Gay antelope sticking head up a two headed gerbil, crap wrong search engine. They'll be some questions from my LinkedIn connections tomorrow.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by raketman11 · 2012-05-22 21:46 · Score: 1

Not in disagreement with the spirit of your post, but I use the Pohosynth app a lot and loving it so wouldn't consider that as a 'go-nowhere' project. Great technology and very usable.

--
trans corpus mortuum
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Sarten-X · 2012-05-23 00:39 · Score: 1

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.

--
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Dishevel · 2012-05-23 02:13 · Score: 1

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.

--
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Sarten-X · 2012-05-23 03:50 · Score: 1

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 to make more capable software.
If one of those developers starts seeing success, and certainly to the extent of DuckDuckGo as the shill brought up, the site will very quickly exceed the free offering, and enter into the paid tier, whose placement has (I expect) been carefully considered by people with far more knowledge than me at both Google and Microsoft. At that point, where the site has reached success, and its usage are indeed putting a drain on the providers' resources, it is ridiculous to expect Microsoft or Google to give away their services for free. It is also ridiculous to expect that the free tier will be sufficient to support a successful site. The only option that I don't see as ridiculous is that busy sites pay for their use.
There is a middle ground, between the rare queries of personal use (like my aforementioned IRC bot) and the constant use that a publicly-successful site would need, where very few projects reside. This area (between 100 and 200 queries/day, apparently) is where the difference is between Google and Microsoft, with that the shill is trying to emphasize. Since I see that as a space occupied by very few projects, the notion that Microsoft's higher free cap will be the sole enabler of a major project also strikes me as ridiculous.

--
You do not have a moral or legal right to do absolutely anything you want.
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by Dishevel · 2012-05-23 03:52 · Score: 1

Ok then. :)

--
Why is it so hard to only have politicians for a few years, then have them go away?
Re:Another failed social project from Microsoft by poetmatt · 2012-05-23 07:16 · Score: 1

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.

Collaborative search so.cl by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 06:55 · Score: -1

This seems like a fun idea from Microsoft. The data should also be great for researchers who can now dig deeper into looking how people use the internet and search.

You could also help grandma with her searches or even random people if they are struggling with theirs.

It's great they still innovate while Google mostly spends time making their search engine worse. In fact, this should also give Bing competitive edge since it's a good data entry. (like they don't already kick Google's ass, amirite?)

Re:Collaborative search so.cl by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:08 · Score: 0

Looks like anonymously accusing people of being an anti-Google shill in every story didn't work out, so now you're trying to create the illusion that Slashdot is infiltrated with astroturfers to keep your premise going?

Facebook is still tops by TheGoodNamesWereGone · 2012-05-22 07:00 · Score: 2

Yeah, FB jumped the shark a long time ago, and look for it to become even more careless about user privacy now that it's publicly traded. No other network, not even Google+, has been able to knock it down yet though. Myspace died because Facebook was 'cooler'. You can't put that in a bottle. Or, if you think you know how, billions of dollars await you.

Re:Facebook is still tops by alen · 2012-05-22 07:03 · Score: 1

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:Facebook is still tops by ILongForDarkness · 2012-05-22 07:34 · 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". 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:Facebook is still tops by painandgreed · 2012-05-22 11:47 · Score: 1

Myspace died and Facebook took over because customers wanted games, a decent scheduling module, and a walled garden where people couldn't put up their own horrible html pages filled with malware (while catering to the people that like to post a hundred times a day and read other people's hundred posts a day). The only thing Myspace really had was lots of music and bands, and they pretty much failed to take advantage of that.
Re:Facebook is still tops by wannabgeek · 2012-05-22 14:37 · 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, but by something else, not another social network. The industry goes through these cycles and the prize keeps changing. Microsoft wasn't unseated by another OS or office software company. It was unseated by Google. Microsoft (or Yahoo! which was a predominant web property then) didn't consider search to be important at the initial stages. Similarly Google was unseated by something it didn't consider significant until Facebook became huge. And now it is playing catchup, just like how MS is trying with Google. Same way, some other activity which is non-existent or insignificant now will become a predominant use of the web/net/technology and THAT will oust Facebook. That is what Mark Z feared Instagram could become and he paid such a huge premium to acquire it.
PS: You may dispute that MS is unseated by G or G is unseated by FB by citing revenues, market cap or something else. But I'm talking about popular imagination. G is very afraid of FB now (if nothing else, in terms of employee drain), just as MS was of G.

--
I'm much more funny, interesting and insightful than the moderators think
Re:Facebook is still tops by chrismcb · 2012-05-22 15:09 · Score: 1

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.

Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by gstoddart · 2012-05-22 07:02 · Score: 0

users can log in with Facebook or Windows Live IDs

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 Facebook to know all of the searches I do on Bing. In fact, I have no idea of who would want this.

This just sounds like one of those solutions in search of a problem.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.

Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by snl2587 · 2012-05-22 07:05 · Score: 2

It's Facebook Connect, which is a pretty standard login method now...
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Big+Sausage+Festival · 2012-05-22 07:06 · 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:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Baloroth · 2012-05-22 07:10 · Score: 3, 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.

--
"None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license." --John Milton
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:20 · 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.
And you think you have an argument against
said policies.
It's not worth posting line by line - answering your post.
Giving any information online is opening yourself up to many things. All you Slashdot guys are included. You think you're so smart, but your account will be the death of you.
AC and Proud of it! Because I'm smarter than you!
ACs are the smart ones. Proxy baby!!
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by gstoddart · 2012-05-22 07:21 · Score: 1

You have no idea what you're talking about, do you?
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.

You don't even need to provide your password if you're already logged in.
That's the last thing I'd want enabled. Otherwise half of the websites you hit would suddenly have access to my information. Fuck that.
In fact, it sounds incredibly stupid and risky. Because when I think of Microsoft and Facebook, neither of them are making me think "now there's a couple of companies I trust to share my information without me needing to do anything".
This is just another example of companies trying to make their products share information that the users generally probably don't.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Big+Sausage+Festival · 2012-05-22 07:34 · Score: 2

And you continue jabbering about things you don't know anything about.

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, but for Google accounts.
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:56 · Score: 0

Do you know what an API is chief?
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by gstoddart · 2012-05-22 07:58 · Score: 0

And you continue jabbering about things you don't know anything about.
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.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by strength_of_10_men · 2012-05-22 08:00 · Score: 1

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:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by gstewart · 2012-05-22 08:16 · Score: 0

It's connecting to Facebook via an FB app. Essentially, it is an FB app that reports back to Microsoft's so.cl servers.
It gains whatever permissions the app has access to, that you provide it access to.
Under the app settings for "so.cl".
This app needs:
Your email address (your@email.dom)
Your groups
I have a FB dev account that I added this thing to so I could see what it wanted. It's supposed to be sending me an e-mail "invitation...soon" and it won't let me log into "so.cl" before that. Not sure what's taking it so long.
The only thing it's letting me do is follow them on Twitter while I wait (yeah... right).
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by X0563511 · 2012-05-22 08:36 · Score: 1

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.

--
For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by baka_toroi · 2012-05-22 08:44 · Score: 1

I'm sure all your brain processing power you use to be paranoid could better serve you if you focus on something more productive
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:47 · Score: 0

Who raped you and why are you taking it out here?
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by gstoddart · 2012-05-22 09:50 · Score: 1

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.

--
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-24 07:28 · Score: 0

When I click on the link to so.cl, I get a blank page, so please explain what happens when you try to log in and click "NO".
Re:Probably violates Facebook's TOS ... by strength_of_10_men · 2012-05-25 02:32 · Score: 1

http://i1260.photobucket.com/albums/ii571/bender_unit/soclbug.png

Broken english error message by Dwedit · 2012-05-22 07:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

"Open require Javascript, please enable the javascript in your browser and try again"

Sounds like an outsourced job.

Re:Broken english error message by maztuhblastah · 2012-05-22 07:29 · 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

--
The real litigious bastards...

I see Frank is searching for nude girls with meat by cpu6502 · 2012-05-22 07:03 · Score: 4, Insightful

No.
There are some things about my friends I'd rather not know.

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"

Paradox! by naroom · 2012-05-22 07:04 · Score: 3, Funny

If this sentence was a headline, would the answer be "no"?

Re:Paradox! by Intrepid+imaginaut · 2012-05-22 07:15 · Score: 2

To be henceforth called naroom's paradox! :D
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-22 07:32 · 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. Thus, all hypothetical questions are outside the framework of Truth, even if they are "true" .. hypothetically speaking.
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.
In your case, the question is in fact NOT a Headline (unless you offer evidence to the contrary), so the answer is "no" since it is not a headline, the premise is false, therefore the answer should be false/negative. You offer a classic example of why hypothetical questions are misleading. However, the correct answer is "hypothetically speaking ... yes"

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by dyingtolive · 2012-05-22 07:42 · Score: 4, Funny

You must be fun at parties.

--
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Re:Paradox! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:00 · Score: 0

No, they hated you because you insisted on missing the point of the lesson through pig-headed, stubborn, stupidity, and by willfully ignoring the "If" at the start of the question in order to satisfy some childish need to demonstrate that you are cleverer than everyone else. You weren't being clever, you were being frustrating, and you should stop being so proud of your behaviour.
Re:Paradox! by Threni · 2012-05-22 08:22 · Score: 0

When people say that it usually reads as "you are smarter than me".
Re:Paradox! by sudonymous · 2012-05-22 08:43 · 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:Paradox! by FrootLoops · 2012-05-22 08:44 · 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)
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:Paradox! by sudonymous · 2012-05-22 08:45 · Score: 1

Now, for a more interesting question:
IFF this sentence was a headline, would the answer be "no"?
Re:Paradox! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:45 · Score: 1

A hypothetical statement with a false antecedent is considered vacuously true. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuous_truth
Re:Paradox! by dyingtolive · 2012-05-22 08:54 · Score: 1

Probably, but it was the kind of lengthy and unsolicited tangential offshoot that I felt should be otherwise cheapened by a terse and simple response. I'm glad at least one other person got a chuckle from my comment.

As far as being less intelligent than anyone else, well, hopefully my ego will manage.

--
Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
Re:Paradox! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 10:42 · Score: 0

Bonch's paradox:
How to diss Google in an arena where his beloved Microsoft failed first and fastest.
Hey Bonch, got another for you -
Microsoft buys Nokia, Nokia shares tank.
Google buys Motorola Mobility. Moto shares lift.
You backed the dead horse.
Re:Paradox! by DragonWriter · 2012-05-22 10:49 · Score: 4, Insightful

One cannot answer hypothetical questions correctly
Sure you can.

since they offer no "truth" (the "yes") from which to derive an answer.
Assuming by "truth" you mean something like "accurate statements of external reality", this is not required for a correct response to a hypothetical question.

The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I was right. ALL hypothetical questions must be answered hypothetically.
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.

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.
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 is important because people often base hypothetical questions as "fact"
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:Paradox! by Chelloveck · 2012-05-22 11:26 · Score: 1

That wasn't hate, that was pity. Most people eventually grow out of the sophomore bullshit phase, but you're special.

--
Chelloveck
I give up on debugging. From now on, SIGSEGV is a feature.
Re:Paradox! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 12:57 · Score: 0

The logic (Philosophy) professors at college hated me, because I always thought I was right.
FTFY.

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.
Wrong...Answering 'no' because you're applying it to one particular interpretation of an external reality means you fundamentally misunderstand the concept of a hypothetical. Your lack of mental capacity to understand why you're wrong is why they hated you, ipso facto they hated you because you are too stupid.
Re:Paradox! by Daniel+Dvorkin · 2012-05-22 14:31 · Score: 2

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.

--
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
Re:Paradox! by LordLimecat · 2012-05-22 14:36 · Score: 2

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 person who has ever considered hypotheticals, and have merely misunderstood what is being driven at. Its also possible that the reason you drove your professors up the wall is NOT because you were smarter than them.
I leave it to you to ponder that, however.
Re:Paradox! by ignavus · 2012-05-22 17:01 · Score: 3, 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.

--
I am anarch of all I survey.
Re:Paradox! by Imrik · 2012-05-22 17:09 · Score: 1

Actually he's not ignoring the "if," as that's what makes it a hypothetical question in the first place.
Re:Paradox! by dadioflex · 2012-05-22 17:27 · Score: 1

No, but hypothetically speaking yes
I do not think that word means what you think it means.
Re:Paradox! by gtall · 2012-05-22 23:53 · Score: 1

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 at college?
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-24 07:25 · Score: 1

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. Einstein was correct, and so am I. ;)

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-24 07:31 · Score: 1

Now you're talking Boolean Math, which IS provable.

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-24 07:39 · Score: 1

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 ...

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.

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-24 07:59 · Score: 1

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 wrong. However, your assumption that I would answer 5 is also wrong, so no"
Hypothetical questions as Boolean constraints is fine, but that is not the extent of hypothetical questions and their ability to draw people into false conclusions. The boolean construct for your question is A = B and and B C, then A C is true (or A = C is false).
Please understand, I get Boolean mathematics. that is not my point.

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by Archangel+Michael · 2012-05-24 08:01 · Score: 1

Boolean Math I get. :-D My problem lies with false premises being asserted as facts ... which is done all the time as "hypothetical questions"

--
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Re:Paradox! by FrootLoops · 2012-05-24 12:06 · Score: 1

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. 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 yourself next to Einstein.
"rarely, if ever, acknowledge any error, no matter how trivial."
-- Yup, you didn't admit to any mistakes at all in your reply to me or in your reply to "DragonWriter" who called part of your original post incoherent (which you ignored; that part clearly is incoherent since it doesn't even parse).
"love to talk about their own beliefs, often in inappropriate social situations"
-- Sort of yes. You started this tangent which has absolutely nothing to do with Microsoft's new social network with very little prodding. By the way, I may find you crazy, but I also find you interesting for the time being.
"...but they tend to be bad listeners, being uninterested in anyone else's experience or opinions."
-- Mostly yes. You seem to have completely ignored the points in my main paragraph, and your response to "DragonWriter" ignores almost his entire post while making a superficial and rather pointless observation.
"misunderstand or fail to use standard notation and terminology"
-- Very much yes. You've invented your own terminology repeatedly ("framework of Truth", "view", "logic of the question", ...). In contrast, both myself and "DragonWriter" referenced standard formal logic, and I referenced a number of standard terms from physics. You have used some basic terminology correctly at least some of the time (eg. premise).
"ignore fine distinctions which are essential to correctly understand mainstream belief."
-- Very much yes. You insist on ignoring the difference between the truth value of "A implies B" and "(A is true) and (A implies B)". You say the former is false in every case that A is false, whereas everyone else says the former can be true even if A is false. If A is false, the latter is in fact always false.
You also seem to fundamentally misunderstand that the experiment Einstein describes cannot be done as far as we currently understand physics since it would take an infinite amount of energy to reach the speed of light. The only value the thought experiment has is hypothetical. Also, while you say Einstein was "correct", in the strict sense he was not. Special and general relativity do describe many facets of reality extraordinarily well, but they're not complete theories since they don't handle quantum-scale interactions. The consensus of physicists is that some larger theory which includes special and general relativity in the appropriate gravity-dominated limits is needed--that is, relativity is just a very good approximation, and Einstein was far, far closer to "correct" than anyone before him.
Re:Paradox! by LordLimecat · 2012-05-26 17:21 · Score: 1

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 serious issues, you can evaluate the consequences of a decision without having to actually make the decision.

but that is not the extent of hypothetical questions and their ability to draw people into false conclusions
People can argue badly, and go from an unproven premise to acting as if they have proven that premise, and that is a well-known logical fallacy-- its known as "begging the question". There is no doubt that people do so. But hypotheticals are a very valuable tool for discussion and rational thought, and you seem way too eager to dismiss them as false nonsense.

Please understand, I get Boolean mathematics. that is not my point.
Everyone here seems to think that you dont get it, or at least what it is good for and how people are using it. Certainly your professor seems to have thought so.
Re:Paradox! by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-29 02:19 · Score: 0

"IF" does not lead to any conclusions WHEN the premises are not true.
Drawing conclusions from an "IF" statement when the premises are not true is a sign that you don't understand conditionality.
The "if" statement is trivially true when its premises are false, because it doesn't claim anything in that case.

I think we can officially diagnose Microsoft... by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:08 · Score: 0

with a bad case of ADHD.

If anyone by Sparticus789 · 2012-05-22 07:11 · 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

--
sudo make me a sandwich

W00T fp. by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:11 · Score: -1

At my frrelance accounts for less

Site attempts to breach browser security by Animats · 2012-05-22 07:12 · Score: 3, 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:Site attempts to breach browser security by Eskarel · 2012-05-22 17:13 · Score: 1

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 permission to a site which is just moronic.
For another, it's about the purpose of the site. Sharing your search results with others without your consent or knowledge would be evil, sharing them because that's what you wanted it to do is not. Firefox is, as per usual, detecting a potential security threat correctly but not allowing the user to respond correctly. Using So.cl involves opting into a sharing situation that in another circumstance would be an indication of massive malware.

Oh god by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:17 · Score: 0

It's like someone shit a cheap Chinese knockoff of Google+ all over my screen. What an abomination.

One Rule 34 to Rule them All by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 07:18 · Score: 0

I for one welcome automated sharing of the terrible things I search for when bored.

And probably your friend's data too... by thrill12 · 2012-05-22 07:21 · Score: 2

...which is the biggest problem with many of these schemes: friends giving away other friends' data. Is that term still correct in that case ?

--
Slashdot: stuff for news, nerds that matter, matter for news, stuff that nerd

pr0n, not academic use by vlm · 2012-05-22 07:22 · Score: 3, 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.

--
"Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger

Do not want! by coinreturn · 2012-05-22 07:33 · Score: 1

The only thing worse than a search engine knowing everything you've searched for is your social network knowing everything you've searched for.

And in other news... by JohnnyMindcrime · 2012-05-22 07:39 · Score: 2

...tickets for the "How many days does Ballmer have left" sweepstake went on sale today.

--
Windows 10 is great - I used it to download Linux.

Share links? wtf? by Nyder · 2012-05-22 07:40 · 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."

--
Be seeing you...

Re:I see Frank is searching for nude girls with me by cpu6502 · 2012-05-22 07:41 · Score: 1

- 1 Offtopic
Hmmm.
A post about a SEARCH on an article about SHARABLE SEARCHES is "offtopic" how?

--
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"

I suspect... by bbbaldie · 2012-05-22 07:42 · Score: 0

...that Internet Explorer will be required to participate. @_o

RE: "so.cl" by denis-The-menace · 2012-05-22 07:56 · Score: 3, Funny

anybody else first pronounced it in their head as "Suckle"?

--
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration

Oh boy. by JustAnotherIdiot · 2012-05-22 07:58 · Score: 2

Another contender for the world's most empty social network.

--
What do I know, I'm just an idiot, right?

plus 2@, Troll) by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:04 · Score: -1

in eternity...romEeo

Why? by wcrowe · 2012-05-22 08:18 · Score: 2

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?

--
Proverbs 21:19

Re:Share links? wtf? by wcrowe · 2012-05-22 08:20 · Score: 1

No doubt. Social isn't always cool. STDs come to mind.

--
Proverbs 21:19

Now if they could fix update loop for .net update by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:22 · Score: 0

Now if they could just fix their crap software. All my XP machines at home are stuck in update loops for 3 updates.

Research shows this to be a chronic problem for microsoft.

Re:I see Frank is searching for nude girls with me by baka_toroi · 2012-05-22 08:45 · Score: 1

There is no -1 Offbase

Re:Now if they could fix update loop for .net upda by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 08:50 · Score: 0

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.

Another failed group of Slashdot comments by TheSkepticalOptimist · 2012-05-22 08:50 · Score: 2

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.

--
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.

Re:Another failed group of Slashdot comments by Nyder · 2012-05-22 08:59 · Score: 2

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.

--
Be seeing you...
Re:Another failed group of Slashdot comments by bbbaldie · 2012-05-22 09:19 · Score: 1

LOL, name one MS innovation in the last three years that hasn't turned out to be a joke. A BAD joke.
Re:Another failed group of Slashdot comments by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 10:08 · Score: 0

"You must be new here".
Re:Another failed group of Slashdot comments by drewco · 2012-05-23 00:00 · Score: 0

Kinect
Re:Another failed group of Slashdot comments by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-23 20:32 · Score: 0

"Insert generic "Microsoft sucks" comment."
Never generic, the shit list for Microsoft's bad business is long.
BTW, it's FUCK MICROSOFT, FTFY.
No go crawl back underneath your patented One Microsoft Way rocks, shills.

Terrible name by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 09:04 · Score: 0

Shared searches with your friends?

would have prefer sear.cl :)

Re: "so.cl" by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 09:29 · Score: 0

anybody else first pronounced it in their head as "Suckle"?

no

Bunch of useless clods by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 09:58 · Score: 0

"Oh no the popcorn man is asking me money for popcorns" really people do you ever think that the only reason FB, G+, Twitter, ... is free is because they use all your data as THEY see fit. After you register everything you do in their system is theirs, so if you don't want that you simply don't register.

Re:Now if they could fix update loop for .net upda by VortexCortex · 2012-05-22 09:58 · Score: 1

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 just gets stuck in a cycle. The PC is usable if we turn off the updates, or ignore that the OS isn't getting patched...

... fortunately, my years of simple explanations of security bugs paid off: coders make errors, malware exploits errors, patches fix errors -- no patches = no security. So, we installed GNU/Linux and they've never had a problem in the past year and a half. The UI learning curve was actually less going from XP to Gnome2 than XP to W7. Now, when my family calls me it's just to talk, there's no hidden "oh, by the way I screwed up my computer again" motives.

Furthermore, after the install, the OS already had the majority of the updates and was fully up to date in about 10min of updates (no reboot), unlike with Windows which took several hours and multiple reboots before it even failed to patch.

lol @ BSA members wondering why people pirate their shite software -- It's not really worth the asking price.
lol @ me replying to AC -- Meh, my code's compiling...

Re:Share links? wtf? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 10:06 · 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 and that gets immediately boring. As for the main purpose, people already collaborate using a lot of other means and I don't see any real value proposition in this stuff.

Something by hey · 2012-05-22 10:08 · Score: 1

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:Something by coolmadsi · 2012-05-23 03:01 · Score: 1

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.

SOCl2 I read by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 10:58 · Score: 0

Which is quite an obnoxious chemical... thionyl chloride.

If Google did this? by dgharmon · 2012-05-22 11:19 · Score: 1

If Google did this would it be an invasion of our privacy?

--
AccountKiller

Bing Minus “cut off Facebook’s air sup by David+Gerard · 2012-05-22 11:26 · Score: 4, Funny

YESLER WAY, Seattle,, Saturday (MSBBC) — Microsoft today stealth-released its new social network, Bing Minus, 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.”

--
http://rocknerd.co.uk

What it Really Is... by DavidD_CA · 2012-05-22 11:47 · Score: 1

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.

--
-David

Re:What it Really Is... by chrismcb · 2012-05-22 15:15 · Score: 1

. 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:Bing Minus “cut off Facebook’s air by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 16:13 · Score: 0

Also available on both models of Kin phone!

Re:Now if they could fix update loop for .net upda by Anonymous Coward · 2012-05-22 18:56 · Score: 0

Ofcource.. every thread about Microsoft would not be complete without some neckbeard linux cheerleader proudly shouting from the rooftops about "saving" some relative/friend from the horrible hell of Windows. Jesus.. you'd think that Linux market share was actually increasing if you read this drivel every single time, but nobody wants to trade one set of problems for another. When Linux UI catches up to Windows 95 in terms of usability, then I might actually switch my folks to it.

Slashdot Mirror

Microsoft Tests Social Search Waters With 'so.cl' Network

135 comments