This guest post is written by Mary Hodder, the founder Dabble. Prior to Dabble, Hodder consulted for a number of startups, did research at Technorati and wrote her masters thesis at Berkeley focusing on live web search looking at blog data.

Real time search is nothing new. It is a problem we’ve been working on for at least ten years, and we likely will still be trying to solve it ten years from now. It’s a really hard problem which we used to call “live web search,” which was coined by Allen Searls (Doc’s son) and refers to the web that is alive, with time as an element, in all factors including search.

The name change to “real time search” seems a way to refocus attention toward the issue of time as an important element of filters. We are still presented with the same set of problems we’ve had at least the past ten years. None of the companies that Erick Schonfeld pointed to the other day seem to be doing anything differently from the live web search / discovery companies that came before. The new ones all seem to be fumbling around at the beginning of the problem, and in fact seem to be doing “recent search,” not really real time search. While I’m sure they’ve worked really hard on their systems, they are no closer than the older live web search systems got with the problem. All the new ones give a reverse chron view, with most mixing Twitter with something: blog data, other microblog data, photos, creating some kind of top list of recent trends. Some have context, like a count of activity over a period of time, or how long a trend has gone on or a histogram (Crowdeye) which both Technorati and Sphere experimented with in the early years. Or they show how many links there are to something or the number of tweets. All seem susceptible to spam and other activities degrading to the user experience and none seem to really provide the context and quality filters that one would like to see if this were to really work. All seem to suffer from needing to learn the lessons we already learned in blog search and topic discovery.

Earlier last week, New York Times reporter David Rohde escaped from a Taliban prison. He had been a Taliban hostage for the last seven months, but the general public had absolutely no clue. In a joint effort by The New York Times and Wikipedia, the story was kept quiet until his daring escape.

In November 2008, Rohde was captured and held hostage by the Taliban, along with a local reporter, Tahir Ludin, and their driver, Asadullah Mangal. But until he managed to escape, most of the general public had absolutely no clue. To prevent Rohde’s value in the eyes of his captors from rising, the New York Times kept more than 35 major news organizations from reporting on the story. They believed that the publicity from reporting his capture would inflate the value of Rohde’s life, increasing the difficulty of negotiating for Rohde’s release. Keeping 35 news organizations quiet was actually not the hard part - but staving off Wikipedia users from publishing the news? That was a bit trickier.

Productivity gains in software engineering are powering innovation. Everyone is more productive these days. This has been a consistent trend for at least the past decade, where productivity gains have been particularly strong within the business sector. According to data from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, today’s business industry workers are on average 30% more productive than their 1998 counterparts (productivity growth of roughly 2.6% per year).

Within the technology industry, productivity has increased more. Thanks to smartphones, improved search engines, better CRM software, and ever-increasing bandwidth, salesmen and marketers can find, receive and process information faster than ever.

The most dramatic gains, however, have occurred within software development.

Software engineers today are about 200-400% more productive than software engineers were 10 years ago because of open source software, better programming tools, common libraries, easier access to information, better education, and other factors. This means that one engineer today can do what 3-5 people did in 1999!

The advent of open source software makes engineers particularly efficient. One VP Engineering that I talked to gave me an anecdote about one module where they used open source files with about 500,000 lines of code and then wrote 7,000 lines of code to stitch it all together. Open source software is also free. In the company I was running in 1999, “software” was a huge budget line item – we had to buy databases, testing suites, libraries, and more. Today all that stuff is free … a start-up might spend more money on sodas for the office than it does on software.

Editor’s note: The following guest post was written by Nova Spivack, CEO of of Radar Networks, the company behind Twine

A new paradigm for using the Internet is about to begin: Virtual Assistants (VA’s) are coming to a mobile device near you.

This week, a stealth startup will demonstrate the first public version of their mobile virtual assistant, Siri. This may mark the beginning of the era of consumer-grade virtual assistants on the Web.

Siri is focused on mobile devices – particularly the iPhone and other smart phones, it has an unusually productive interface and user experience, and it is super useful – it is something I would really use every day. As a result I would not be surprised if Siri becomes one of the top iPhone applications within a few months after their launch. (Disclosure: In the past, I worked on the DARPA-funded CALO project from which Siri sprung).

The team at Siri has given me a sneak-preview of their technology and product, and here I will dive deep to try to uncover the real significance and technical underpinnings of what they are doing. In addition, I’ll delve into the implications of the virtual assistant (VA) trend and what it might mean for us in the future.

Editor’s note: This is a guest post by David Sacks, the Founder and CEO of Yammer and Geni. Previously he was the COO of PayPal and produced the Academy Award-nominated movie “Thank You For Smoking.” Sacks says he’s incorporating the retweet feature into Yammer, his “Twitter for the enterprise” product that launched at TechCrunch50 last year.

While there are many new features that Twitter could launch, the most powerful are likely to be based on behaviors that users have invented themselves.

That’s exactly what happened with @replies. Users started addressing each other by their @usernames. Twitter noticed and officially supported the feature. As a result, Twitter is on its way to becoming the discussion board for the web.

Editor’s note: This is a guest post by Keith Rabois, vice president of strategy and business development for Slide, the social entertainment company.

On Monday afternoon, I was speaking on a panel at the Social Graph Symposium when the moderator asked me what eBay could do to revitalize its marketplace by leveraging the social graph. Dave McClure, like many pundits, presumes the social graph could be a great boost for eBay, if not an outright panacea. I replied, “nothing.”

It’s actually the social graph and similar products that have placed a stake in eBay.com. Most often, people blame eBay’s decay on factors like the weakening economy, the rise of Amazon, as well as eBay’s own inefficient search functionality. But the real and simple reason is eBay is no longer fun. Over the years, it has lost online ground and eyeballs to pure entertainment destinations such as YouTube and social networking sites like MySpace and Facebook.

This is a guest post by Dave McClure, a startup advisor and internet marketing nerd who runs a seed-stage investment program for Founders Fund.

So you consider yourself an internet entrepreneur, investor or expert, huh? Chances are you know a lot about what it’s like to be a Western technologist with Western customers, but you know very little about how the other half of the world (also known as Asia) lives and works.

If you find yourself reluctantly agreeing with that assessment, perhaps it’s time for you to jump on plane with a bunch of other Bay Area geeks and venture over to the other side of the Pacific Rim. Founders Fund and Web2Asia cordially invite you to join over 25 other techies for an eastward trip we’re calling GeeksOnAPlane (don’t worry, emergency exercises such as this one are not expected mid-flight). Starting on June 7th and lasting for 10 days, our gaggle of geeks will hit up Tokyo, Beijing and Shanghai and learn lots about Asian platforms, markets, and partners along the way. And, of course, we’ll have loads of fun and do some cool touristy stuff as well.

Ticket prices vary depending on whether you want to hit up all three cities or just visit one or two. See our event page for full pricing details and the ability to register online today. Airfare gets more expensive after today so make sure to register and book your flights soon.

Editor’s note: The guest post below was written by Brian Lawe, CEO and Founder of MyStoreCredit. Brian’s company develops e-commerce tools around payments, cross-promotion and customer mapping. He’s been watching Twitter for some time.

The rumors are ripe that Apple, Microsoft, Google and News Corp are all sniffing around Twitter – but no one has mentioned the best fit: Amazon. If Amazon doesn’t jump into the arena, someone at Twitter ought to make a call to Jeff Bezos. Neither Amazon nor Twitter should miss the powerful synergies from merging the two companies. To wit:

1. Introducing Twitter Payments: Amazon has been struggling to gain traction with its payments platform. They will never unseat or even threaten PayPal until they come up with a unique and differentiated strategy. The world does not need yet another payment option. But Twitter is something new and does offer a smart strategy. By rewarding Twitter users for associating their Twitter accounts with their Amazon account, Amazon can instantly create a new, potentially dominating powerhouse in payments for mobile and online transactions.

Richard Rosenblatt was the Chairman of MySpace at the time that it and parent company Intermix were sold to News Corp. in 2005. He is currently the founder and CEO of Demand Media, a Los Angeles based social media company that has raised over $350 million in capital. We asked him to write a guest post giving advice to the new MySpace executive team. You can follow Richard on Twitter at twitter.com/demandrichard.

My Insider Perspective from the Outside

When Michael asked me to guest write this post, I hesitated because MySpace’s new management team is extremely capable and will determine their own path to restore the company to its glory days. But after fielding dozens of calls and hearing erroneous comments being attributed to me, I decided to weigh in with the hope of providing some general thoughts for the team to consider as they embark on their journey. I’ve never been a fan of armchair generals so I’ll refrain from giving specific operational advice – I am not in the trenches and haven’t been involved in the day-to-day operations for several years. We had our share of challenges, but in the end we prevailed, and I wish the same success for the new MySpace team – as well as all entrepreneurs entering the social media space.

Keeping past experiences in mind, here are some general thoughts on where MySpace can push forward:

This is a guest post by Neil Patel, co-founder of KISSmetrics and blogger at QuickSprout.com. He also does consulting work for a number of major Internet properties, including TechCrunch.

When you think about growing your blog, whether it is a personal, professional or company blog, what is the first thing that comes to your mind? Chances are it is something related to traffic or subscribers. Getting more traffic or subscribers is never a bad thing, but if you really want more sustainable traffic you first have to understand the people coming to your blog. If you can’t make them happy, how can you expect your traffic to grow?

Stop Assuming!

You have a vision of how you see your blog and where you want it to go. The reality is that your vision may not match up with what your readers are expecting. So instead of assuming things about your readers, start getting feedback from them.

The guest post below was written by Reid Hoffman, CEO and Founder of LinkedIn. Reid, who’s been a prolific writer lately, is a strong advocate of entrepreneurism and the startup mentality. See his recent Washington Post article Let Our Start-Ups Bail Us Out, and the guest post he wrote here on TechCrunch, Stimulus 2.0: It’s The Startups, Stupid. Reid has recently appeared on Charlie Rose, and we had a chance to sit down with him earlier this year for a video interview as well. Reid is an investor in over 60 web ventures including Digg, Facebook, Flickr, Friendster, FunnyOrDie, Ning, Last.fm, Six Apart and Technorati. He is also a member of the nominating committee of our upcoming TechFellow Awards with Founders Fund.

TechCrunch and Founders Fund announced the first annual TechFellow Awards last week. This is a great time to stimulate investment and recognize and encourage tech entrepreneurs –starting up is cheaper, talent is more fluid, and people are more inclined to take calculated risks. If we can find more ways to spur investment, it will be good for the entrepreneur now and good for society later.

As a serial investor, I’ve enjoyed backing some good Web 2.0 companies, and it’s helped me develop a shortlist of criteria to cut the wheat from the chaff. After five minutes of a pitch, I know if I’m not going to invest, and after 30 minutes to an hour, I generally know if I will. Many entrepreneurs are product-focused, which leads them to pitch the brilliance of the product. Others are money-minded, so they can over think the business plan. But neither of these approaches answer the first few questions I want to know as an investor:

This a Guest Post by Mary Hodder, founder of Dabble.com, a social video search site and blogger for Napsterization. Hodder is a veteran Silicon Valley technologist and was most recently VP of Products at Apisiphere, a geolocation mobile company building an enterprise platform for mobile developers. This post is in response to the Amazon’s removal of sales rankings on a number of gay- and lesbian-themed books due to a glitch.

Webopedia defines an algorithm as:

(al´g&-rith-&m) (n.) A formula or set of steps for solving a particular problem. To be an algorithm, a set of rules must be unambiguous and have a clear stopping point. Algorithms can be expressed in any language, from natural languages like English or French to programming languages like FORTRAN.

We use algorithms every day. For example, a recipe for baking a cake is an algorithm. Most programs, with the exception of some artificial intelligence applications, consist of algorithms. Inventing elegant algorithms — algorithms that are simple and require the fewest steps possible — is one of the principal challenges in programming.

The ethical issue with algorithms and information systems generally is that they make choices about what information to use, or display or hide, and this makes them very powerful. These choices are never made in a vacuum and reflect both the conscious and subconscious assumptions and ideas of their creators.

Despite China’s massively growing internet market, international giants like Google and Facebook are having trouble making gains with the 300 million Chinese online users. China’s netizens are on average very young – 66.7 % of them are younger than 29 years old and 35.2 % of them are teenagers—with social networking and entertainment applications being the most popular.

While companies like Facebook struggle to conquer market share in China and to create viable business models everywhere, their Chinese clones have built lucrative cash machines literally earning billions of dollars a year. Unfortunately, adopting Chinese methods may not help American social networks due both to cultural differences in Chinese user behavior and industry practices. Our analysis of the Chinese social networking scene after the jump.

Editor’s note: The following guest post was written by Mrinal Desai, who was an early employee of LinkedIn before he co-founded CrossLoop, a startup funded by El Dorado and Venrock. You can follow him on Twitter.

I try and test many social services and since 2003, there are only three that represent me—LinkedIn, Facebook and Twitter. MySpace was a service that I tried but it did not appeal to me personally for one reason—I wanted to connect with real people and I did not “see” them on MySpace.

I started using Twitter in early 2007, and it gave me something I cherish in the offline world – the ability to connect to real people who share my values and learn from them. It also has given me access to people I might never have otherwise been able to speak to. Through Twitter I have had conversations with the likes of Steve Case and Craig Newmark. I learn about new services and tools, read news when it happens and “my dumb questions’ give me instant gratification when people smarter than me actually answer them. Against all the initial skepticism of the people around me at home and at the office, I thoroughly enjoyed Twitter and also noticed that it was ‘stealing’ me away from Facebook and other services like Google Reader.

Yet now I am beginning to question if Twitter is turning into MySpace. Here are five parallels just off the top of my head:

This guest post is written by Larry Chiang, a co-founder of Duck9 who also regularly blogs for for BusinessWeek. In this post, he discusses some of the pros of organizing events as a means to increase your own exposure and make connections.

My party mentor, Susan Roane, the author of ‘How to Work a Room‘, once told me, “Larry, there are two types of people in this world: hosts and guests”. She argues that hosting gets you more influence and adds value at a party. I believe her.

I took it a couple steps further because partying and social engineering intrigue me. I see how people in positions of power use parties to further grow their influence. In this post, I boil down my knowledge and reveal how hosting and producing events can boost your visibility, increase your deal flow and help you sway people.

This is a guest post written by Carol Kravitz, a former fashion executive and the founder and CEO of Kravitz & Associates, an upscale and exclusive matchmaking service. Kravitz is working on a personal project with Michael Arrington and is enlisting TechCrunch readers for their help:

Finding that special someone is serious business (I know, I make a great living by finding lost souls and matching them with that special someone). But I’m not here to pitch my business today - we only take private referrals and frankly if it wasn’t for this terrific opportunity to help out TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington, I wouldn’t have agreed to expose my business to this much publicity. But the sheer volume of TechCrunch readers out there means there is a stastically relevant chance that one of you will know someone who might be willing to help.

To be blunt, we’re looking for your help in finding a wife, or at least a serious girlfriend, for Michael. Or even just a dinner date.

Michael hasn’t had a long term girlfriend in years. About six months after he started TechCrunch in 2005 his then serious girlfriend of four years dumped him hard. Apparently blogging for 20 hours a day doesn’t allow for much personal interaction with a significant other. Even today, a restraining order prohibits Michael from visiting parts of Los Angeles.

This guest post is written by Vic Gundotra, Vice President of Engineering for Google’s mobile and developer products. (Prior to Google, he spent 15 years at Microsoft, most recently as their GM of Platform Evangelism.) Vic credits his now-7-year-old with forecasting the importance of mobile data access, and now carries at least 4 phones at all times. Fortunately, he had two kids before adopting the possibly-prophylactic habit.

Focus on the mobile user, and all else will follow

Simpler data, better browsers, and a smoother experience

Today the mobile industry finds itself in a unique position to do right by its users:

Worldwide phone penetration continues to climb at a break-neck pace, with over 4 billion mobile subscribers at last count.¹ (In comparison, the PC industry is forecasted to see its sharpest unit decline in history.²) Prevailing economic conditions will accelerate this trend, as users consolidate pricey communication services into cost-effective, all-in-one mobile devices.³ And for the first time ever, half of all new connections to the internet will come from a phone in 2009.⁴

Google’s mobile traffic reflects these milestones — having quintupled since 2007⁵ — and it underscores users’ appetite for mobile data services. But as a community of operators, device manufacturers and software providers, we continue to get in their way. In short, and as a general rule, we make it too costly, too unfamiliar, and too difficult to do anything beyond voice calls.

In reply I offer up three suggestions: simpler data plans, better web browsers, and a smoother on-device experience. And in each case I’ll use Google traffic numbers as a proxy for total internet usage and user happiness.

Editor’s note: Last Sunday, we published a guest post by Wharton Professor Eric Clemons on “Why Advertising Is Failing On The Internet.” The post questioned a basic assumption that many of us in the tech industry hold near and dear. It sparked a blogstorm and 600-plus comments, most of them filled with rage. Even Danny Sullivan, the normally unperturbable editor-in-chief of SearchEngineLand, couldn’t believe that Clemons could be serious, and let loose in his own post. He even offered for us to republish it here (and he wasn’t the only one champing at the bit to write a response).

Instead, we invited Sullivan to present a more concise counter-argument, absent some of the raw emotion that fueled his initial response. It is presented below, followed by a rebuttal from Clemons, and then another round. We instructed both to fight clean, but fight hard. In his rebuttal, Clemons offers this startling long bet: “In five years revenues from internet advertising will constitute less than 20% of internet business revenues, excluding revenues from the sale of physical goods. Winner buys the loser lunch and gets to gloat.” Danny counters with his own wager. These two can’t even agree on what to bet on.

This is a guest post written by Bo Wang from iPhone app developer house Team iBokan, part of Bokan Technologies, about the lessons learned while conducting a pricing experiment on brick game Galaxy Impact, the company’s first iPhone application. For a different take on paid versus ad-supported iPhone apps, read our previous post.

Galaxy Impact, a classic brick-break game and the first iPhone app created by Team iBokan, went on sale in iTunes App Store on Oct 27, 2008, free of charge. It had about 220,000 downloads in its first two weeks and was ranked as No 10 in “Top Free Apps” in the Game category and No 20 in “Top Free Apps” overall, before we started charging a $.99 fee for purchases on Nov 9th 2008.

(Details after the jump)

While working on a follow-up story to the Global Grind celebrity mass that they currently perpetrate as content I came across something much more interesting. The CEO of the company Navarrow Wright is no longer listed on the company About Us page suggesting that Wright and the company have parted ways. A cached version of the page from March 17th at 6:28pm still lists him as CEO so the split was more than likely the result of internal disagreement and definitely abrupt.

This is no surprise especially if you take a look at the direction of the product since Russell Simmons has become more involved in his new role as Editor-in-Chief, which said simply means Simmons leveraging his celeb contacts for content. In most cases to the detriment of the product. My bet is the 2, Wright and Simmons, couldn’t see eye to eye on the direction of the product and what it actually is. I’m calling this more than a hunch since it was clear there was tension between the 2 when they were featured in a video while at NPR studios for an interview in November of last year:

When Lance Armstrong sat down with John Battelle at the Web 2.0 Summit last November, he had been twittering for about 10 days and was jokingly asking that “shoe guy” to send some followers his way. Now four months later, even Richard Rosenblatt, CEO of Demand Media and the guy who helped get Lance into Twitter, has been surprised by how much @lancearmstrong has taken to the platform: twittering and twitpic’n about training, races, travel, family, food, movies, and his mission to grow the fight against cancer.

For those of you interested in more than 140 characters, Lance took some time out to discuss his new habit.

Q: You started using Twitter back in November. You are now closing in on 300,000 followers and you tweet more times per day than most people brush their teeth. Can you point to a couple of factors that have resonated with you making Twitter part of your daily routine?

Lance Armstrong: Well, 140 characters fits my personality well. I’m not much for small talk so 140 gets me that. I see long drawn out emails and I delete them. It also brings a certain transparency to my life that others may have never seen or realized. Lastly, it works great for talking about the thing I care about the most (behind my family) and that’s fighting cancer. Twitter builds grassroots movements quicker than anything I’ve ever seen.

Editor’s note: Below is a guest post from Nova Spivack, CEO of Radar Networks, about a new computational knowledge engine called Wolfram Alpha being developed by computer scientist Stephen Wolfram. Spivack originally published it on Twine, and it is republished here with his permission. Some of the sections have been rearranged for clarity.

Stephen Wolfram is building something new — and it is really impressive and significant. In fact it may be as important for the Web (and the world) as Google, but for a different purpose.

Stephen was kind enough to spend two hours with me last week to demo his new online service — Wolfram Alpha (scheduled to open in May). In the course of our conversation we took a close look at Wolfram Alpha’s capabilities, discussed where it might go, and what it means for the Web, and even the Semantic Web.

Stephen has not released many details of his project publicly yet, so I will respect that and not give a visual description of exactly what I saw. However, he has revealed it a bit in a recent article, and so below I will give my reactions to what I saw and what I think it means. And from that you should be able to get at least some idea of the power of this new system.

A Computational Knowledge Engine for the Web

In a nutshell, Wolfram and his team have built what he calls a “computational knowledge engine” for the Web. OK, so what does that really mean? Basically it means that you can ask it factual questions and it computes answers for you.

It doesn’t simply return documents that (might) contain the answers, like Google does, and it isn’t just a giant database of knowledge, like the Wikipedia. It doesn’t simply parse natural language and then use that to retrieve documents, like Powerset, for example. Instead, Wolfram Alpha actually computes the answers to a wide range of questions — like questions that have factual answers such as “What country is Timbuktu in?” or “How many protons are in a hydrogen atom?” or “What is the average rainfall in Seattle?”

Editor’s note: The guest post below was written by Reid Hoffman, CEO and Founder of LinkedIn. Reid has some strong opinions about how startups can help right the economy, and he offers some suggestions below. (You can also catch him tonight on Charlie Rose, or check out our interview we did with him at Davos). Reid is an investor in over 60 web ventures including Digg, Facebook, Flickr, Friendster, FunnyOrDie, Ning, Last.fm, Six Apart and Technorati.

While at Davos this year, the conversation spurred a lot of thought about how we can navigate through the economic crisis. Yesterday, I shared a few of these thoughts in a Washington Post op-ed to offer a Silicon Valley perspective to lawmakers.

I believe the real fix for the economy is massive entrepreneurship and innovation to create new jobs through new products and services. Here are a few of my proposals:

This guest post is written by Jack Arrington, who contributed 50% of the genetic material required to produce TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington. Jack was around at the very beginning of what we today call the Information Technology business. In 1950 pure business necessity drove Bank of America, then the largest bank in the world, to look for ways to automate the labor intensive job of handling checks. From that necessity ERMA was born, one of the first large scale data processing machines for business. Jack joined Bank of America in 1963 as a Computer Operator Trainee. He retired in 2002 as Head of Data Processing Operations.

2009 is the half-century milestone in the use of information technology for business applications, and it’s an opportunity to look back and give a nod of appreciation to those early IT entrepreneurs.

In the mid-20th century, the majority of people did not have checking accounts and none of them had bank-issued credit cards. Those in the lower and middle economic classes mostly relied upon cash to buy goods and pay bills. If funds needed to be sent long distances, Western Union provided facilities for the purchase of money orders that were communicated via telegraph and could be retrieved by the payee in another town or country. But the process of consumer banking was tailored for the needs of people who lived most if not all of their lives in the same town. Banking activities were mostly limited to home and car loans and the average customer was well known by the banking staff.

Editor’s note: The following is a guest post by Eric Clemons, Professor of Operations and Information Management at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. The views he expresses are his own, and we present them here to foster debate.

The mainstream press, such as The New York Times, has noticed that even Google itself is starting to worry about the possibility that the Department of Justice may seek regulation, possibly even the break-up of Google. How can this be? How can a firm seen as a triumph of creative capitalism and a virtuous contributor to the economy (“Don’t be evil!”) possibly be suspected of anything? Is this regulatory oversight gone mad? Not exactly.

Below I summarize what I do know about Google’s behavior and what I believe the Department of Justice is likely to perceive and likely to need to demonstrate if it seeks to act against Google. In a later post I will expand, including what I believe but cannot yet demonstrate. It’s important to remember that I am not an attorney, just a computer science faculty member at a major business school, with some litigation experience, and that I have had no conversations with Google or with the Department of Justice about these issues, but I believe that what follows provides some insight into thinking at the Department of Justice.