All posts by David Pennock

FYI 2 CFPs: WWW2008-IM & ACM EC'08

Here are two Call For P*s for upcoming academic/research conferences:

  1. Call for Participation: For the first time, the World Wide Web Conference has a track on Internet Monetization, including topics in electronic commerce and online advertising. The conference will be held in Beijing April 21-25, 2008. If the Olympics in China are all about image, then the Internet in China is all about, well, Monetization. (A lot of it, growing fast.)
  2. Call for Papers: The 2008 ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce will be held in Chicago July 8-12, 2008 in proximity to AAAI-08 and GAMES 2008. Research papers on all aspects of electronic commerce — including personal favorites prediction markets and online advertising — are due February 7, 2008.

You can signal your interest on social events calendar upcoming.org: WWW2008 | EC’08

Hope to see some of you in either the Forbidden or Windy City, as the case may be.

Yahoo! Election 2008 Political Dashboard

I’m happy to report the launch of the Yahoo! Election ’08 Political Dashboard. Using the dashboard, you can navigate through a wealth of election-related data, including prediction market data from intrade.com, polling data from Real Clear Politics, search buzz data from Yahoo!, and financial contributions data, regional demographic data, and historical voting records from AP. You can view the election landscape from the national level or dive in deeper to investigate trends state by state.

Yiling, Tej, Lance, and I played supporting roles among a cast that includes fantastic teams at Yahoo! News, UI/Design, Ops, Q&A, and more.

We’ve come a long way since 2006.

See also coverage from TechCrunch and the Yahoo! corporate blog.

The Economist makes up

Here’s an update on my fractured relationship with The Economist magazine.

To my pleasant surprise, Alan Press, Vice President of Marketing & Circulation at The Economist actually posted a comment on my blog agreeing to cease and desist their renewal scare tactics!

We agree, the language is bad. We are discontinuing the use of this letter going forward, and will replace it with a message that makes clear how much we value readers like you.

(I didn’t notice the concession at first, as his comment got stuck in my Akismet spam folder for several days.)

I thought this was a stand-up gesture. I temporarily felt all warm and fuzzy about the good old days when The Economist and I first met. In all seriousness, I do appreciate the public comment and the prompt/effective action.

So are we getting back together?

That’s none of your business!

In any case, I’m happy to see blogplaining/freedbacking actually have an effect.

Computational aspects of prediction markets: Book chapter and extended bibliography

Rahul Sami and I wrote a chapter called “Computational aspects of prediction markets” in the book Algorithmic Game Theory, Cambridge University Press, forthcoming 2007.

You can download an almost-final version of our chapter here.

Update 2007/09/19: You can now also download the entire book Algorithmic Game Theory: username agt1user , password camb2agt . If you like it, you can buy it.

In the course of writing the chapter, we compiled an extended annotated bibliography that ended up being too long to publish in its entirety in the book. So we trimmed the bibliographic notes in the book to cover only the most directly relevant citations. You can download the full extended bibliography here.

Here is the abstract of our chapter:

Prediction markets (also known as information markets) are markets established to aggregate knowledge and opinions about the likelihood of future events. This chapter is intended to give an overview of the current research on computational aspects of these markets. We begin with a brief survey of prediction market research, and then give a more detailed description of models and results in three areas: the computational complexity of operating markets for combinatorial events; the design of automated market makers; and the analysis of the computational power and speed of a market as an aggregation tool. We conclude with a discussion of open problems and directions for future research.

If you’re interested in this topic, you might also take a look at our recent paper on Betting on permutations, published after the book chapter was completed.

Finally, for a higher-level treatment, here is a pre-print version of a short letter on “Combinatorial betting” that we submitted to SIGecom Exchanges.

Predictions: Apple bites, Google eats

Happy 5768 everyone!

Time for some predictions.

  1. Apple bites into PC pie. Apple Computer (remember them?) will attain at least 30% PC market share by 5772.

    Probability: 40% ; Willing to stake: $Y20

    On the front lines, silver Powerbooks are infiltrating in droves. At techie conventions and computer science conferences, penetration has gone from almost zero to something approaching 1/3 by anecdotal evidence. Wandering about these venues, it’s not terribly uncommon to see a table of three or four who apparently all agree to think different. At Yahoo!, more and more of Jobs’s ministers are simply preaching to the converted. In our Yahoo! Research New York office, for example, laps are topped at least two to one with half-eaten half-glowing apples. Even tech celeb Marc Andreessen has returned to the fold.

    But can the Apple bug jump from geeks to grandmas? (Well, my daughters’ grandma is already infected.) I’m guessing so. After all, these same alphadopters led the way to mp3s, Google, Wikipedia, Slashdot, blogs, Firefox, Digg, and Homestar Runner, unlocking remarkable truths along the way like “web search can be monetized”, “Really Simple trumps Really Smart”, and “give up now, Friendster has already won”. (Oops.)

    Why is there an Apple renaissance on the desktop? A big reason is that the OS’s natural monopoly is not so natural anymore. Today, the browser is the most important piece of software on your computer, and a viable cross-platform browser (Firefox) exists that almost every web site designs to. A second reason: it turns out that Intel chips are faster and better than PowerPC chips after all, despite decades of vehement Apple fanboy arguments to the contrary. Third, Apple’s built-in iLife software suite really is astonishingly useful and well designed and speaks to the new killer apps of the desktop: pictures, music, video, web, and email. A final reason is, well, Apple is cool, and technology is at least as much about fashion as function, or at least more than geeks would like to admit.

    Disagreers can accept my yootleoffer or put your play money where your mouth is on related bets at PPX and Inkling.

    (Side note: My take on Apple’s fumbled iPhone price cut: I believe that Apple reacted in fear of the looming gPhone. However, if history is a guide, that fear may be an exaggerated fear of the unknown.)

  2. Google eats its own dog food. Google buys an advertisement by the end of 5768.

    Probability: 60% ; Willing to stake: $Y20

    Google is the king of selling advertisements. So they must believe that advertising is effective, right? Then why doesn’t Google advertise for itself? (I’m not counting recruiting ads.) I’m guessing the reason is that they don’t have to. As a media darling, they get more than enough free press to catalyze their already monstrous word of mouth. I expect that as the glow wears off, as some of the not not evil jabs — deserved or not — start to stick, and as they settle into Big Company mode, you will start to see Google spots on TV and elsewhere.

2007/09/17 Update: Sean McNee noticed that Google is advertising Google Apps to enterprise customers on VentureBeat and the Seattle Times [example ad image]. As a result, let me update my prediction to “Google buys a TV ad for Google.com aimed at mass consumers”.

2007/09/19 Update: Maverick blogger, Maverick owner, Yahoo! benefactor, and uber alphadopter Mark Cuban is dancing with the Steves.

2010 Update: I was right, just 1.5 years too early. In other words, I was wrong.

My ugly breakup with The Economist

Have you ever broken up with someone and their reaction was so ugly that that it made you realize how glad you are to be out of the relationship?

Me either.

But that’s how I felt after dropping my subscription to The Economist magazine.

Here is the text of my final renewal notice:

Dear David Pennock,

Your timing could hardly be worse.

Just as the world is connecting,
opening up unprecedented opportunities …

…you go and break your connection to The Economist.

Is it the bottom line? Cost cutting? It’s true you’ll save a bit by cutting The Economist. But think what you’ll lose. Bottom lines don’t replace communication lines. Won’t you please use this opportunity to reinstate your subscription and restore your special world-connection?

Or, as I interpret it: “Please please please, you stupid cheapskate.” I guess there’s nothing like a pretentious magazine marketing department scorned.

Sorry, Economist, you have a lot going for you and I enjoyed our time together, but it’s time to move on.

Checkers bot can't lose… Ever

Mathematicians, third graders, and talkative defense department computers alike all know that there is an infallible way to play tic tac toe. A competent player can always force at least a tie against even the most savvy opponent.

In the July issue of Science, artificial intelligence researchers from the University of Alberta announced they had cracked the venerable game of checkers in the same way, identifying an infallible strategy that cannot lose.1

It doesn’t matter if the strategy is unleashed against a bumbling novice or a flawless grandmaster, it can always eke out at least a tie if not a win. In other words, any player adopting the strategy (a computer, say) makes for the most flawlessy grandmasterest checkers player of all time, period.

The proof of correctness is a computational proof that took six years to complete and was twenty-seven years in the making.

Tic tac toe and checkers are examples of deterministic games that do not involve dice, cards, or any other randomizing element, and so “leave nothing to chance”. In principle, every deterministic game, including chess, has a best possible guaranteed outcome2 and a strategy that will unfailingly obtain it. For chess, even though we know that an optimal strategy exists, the game is simply too complex for any kind of proof — by person or machine — to unearth it as of yet.

The UofA team’s accomplishment is significant, marking a major milestone in artificial intelligence research. Checkers is probably the first serious, popular game with a centuries-long history of human play to be solved, and certainly the most complex game solved to date.

Next stop: Poker

Meanwhile, the UofA’s poker research group is building Poki, a computer player for Texas Hold’em poker. Because shuffling adds an element of chance, poker cannot be solved for an infallible strategy in the same way as chess or checkers, but it can in principal still be solved for an expected-best strategy. Although no one is anywhere near solving poker, Poki is probably the world’s best poker bot. (A CMU team is also making great strides.)

Poki’s legitimate commercial incarnation is Poker Academy, a software poker tutor. An unauthorized hack of Poker Academy [original site taken down; see 2006 archive.org copy] may live an underground life as a mechanical shark in online poker rooms. (Poki’s creators have pledged not to use their bot online unidentified.)

Poker web sites take great pains to weed out bots — or at least take great pains to appear to be weeding out bots. Then again, some bot runners take great pains to avoid detection. This is a battle the poker web sites cannot possibly win.

1Technically, tic tac toe is “strongly solved”, meaning that the best strategy is known starting from every game position, while the UofA team succeeded in “weakly solving” checkers, meaning that they found a best strategy starting from the initial game board configuration.
2The best possible guaranteed outcome is the best outcome that can always be assured, no matter how good the opponent.

Betcha loses a battle; Not the war?

That didn’t take long.

Betcha is (was) an honor-based peer-to-peer betting service based in Seattle. On July 9, the Washington State Gambling Commission swept into Betcha’s offices, Gestapo style, confiscating everything, right down to their Programming PHP manual. Founder Nick Jenkins is now staring straight in the face of our country’s unconscionable forfeiture laws: you know, the ones that give law enforcement the right to sell Nick’s stuff on eBay and keep the proceeds, without ever charging him with a crime.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer reported on the raid. The vast majority of the commenters sided with Betcha, urging Washington State officials to find better uses for their time and tax money, lamenting Washington’s ever-growing “Nanny State” credentials, and decrying the seemingly corrupt and hypocritical gambling politics involved.

To Nick and other Betcha employees and investors: Thank you for taking this risk and putting your stake in the ground, even if the current outcome is not what you’d hoped for. I hope you have the wherewithal to see this through to your day in court so that, if nothing else, we can get some clarity in the law. Here’s to hoping you’ve simply lost a battle and not the war.

Readers: Go to Betcha’s site to sign up for email updates and find out how to help.

Betcha's gambit

Betcha is bold. To say the least. The founder Nick Jenkins is either crazy, brilliant, or, like many founders, both. Betcha is a platform for peer to peer betting not unlike gottabet, betfair, or intrade. Except for two (intimately related) details: (1) all debts are on the honor system, and (2) it’s based in Seattle, WA, UIGEA. Betcha makes no bones about it ( no “wink wink” here): they expect users to bet on anything and everything including sports. But because coughing up is not strictly enforced, the site evades the letter of the gambling laws. To engender trust, Betcha verifies its users’ credit cards and tracks their reputation scores, but in the end all payments are voluntary. The site earns money via listing fees.

I can’t help but admire Jenkins and Co., and I hope their gambit succeeds: my heart is with them even if my head is a step behind. (For more legal discussion see Tom Bell and The Boston Globe.)

And as much as I like the concept, I do have to ding Betcha for one of the most convoluted, head-scratching explainers I’ve heard in a long time:

“As an open, honor-based betting platform, Betcha is like an auction site, Las Vegas, a marketplace of ideas, and The Golden Rule — all rolled into one. [1]

[1] “The Golden Rule” refers to the idea that you should do unto others as you’d have them do unto you. It is the fundamental principle behind most of the world’s major religions. And while we aren’t here to push religion on anyone, doing well by others is a principle we’d like to see more of.

Whaa? Four (weak) analogies plus a long-winded footnote? C’mon, Betcha, please KISS.

"You don't post enough"

I‘ve been blogging for about 33 weeks and this is my 31st post. Of those, I’d say roughly 12 are meals1 and 19 are snacks. So I’m clocking in a bit below one post per week, 1.5 meals per month.

If you feel that’s too few, or if you have any other comments or recommendations let me know. I’ll see what I can do. Without satisfied readers I’m just a tree falling in the woods 0.94 times a week.

In the meantime, if you’re craving more, you’re welcome to subscribe to the RSS feed of my shared bookmarks.2,3 There you can track me goofing off — er, conducting vital industry research. My bookmarking pace is closer to daily and I try to annotate each site with a revealing sentence or two.

Here’s an example of what the feed looks like in bloglines.4

1A meal requires some non-trivial amount of preparation on my part and digestion on yours. Hint: this post is not a meal.
2My shared bookmarks also appear in the two My Web Bookmarks widgets on the right hand column of this page.
3Christmas asks why I use My Web instead of del.icio.us. No good reason except that I started using My Web first and I’m happy with it. By now I’ve invested enough effort in My Web that I don’t care to switch. Someday My Web, del.icio.us, and Yahoo! Bookmarks should play nice. UPDATE 2009/02/04: I’ve now switched to delicious.
4Looks like there are two blogliners subscribed to my bookmarks and 44 subscribed to the Oddhead Blog main feed.