Understanding company decisions using knowledge graphs

Recently I read this article (Cloudera adds data engineering, visualization to its Data Platform) and wondered why it was relevant. To an industry-expert the implications are clear, but to me – an industry-novice – not. This situation made me wonder how a knowledge graph can be used to automatically answer the “why” behind a company’s decision. Based on an innovation process in patent analysis, I came up with this process: I manually identified a similar article (Tech and Antitrust Follow-up, Google Buys Looker, Salesforce Buys Tableau; paywall) From this article, I constructed the knowledge graph below. I defined explicit relationships (as mentioned in the article) and implicit relationships (in green; these relationships can be inferred from an external knowledge source like Wikipedia) The knowledge graph depicts the following points: Google’s biggest competitors (Microsoft and Amazon) own tools in the data analytics and visualization segment (Looker’s segment) the data analytics and visualization segment is important to Google because that segment is part of the “Big Data movement” (implicit relationship) and “Big Data” is important to Google (implicit relationship) Google does not own any tools in the analytics segment Based on this information, it makes sense that Google acquired a tool in

Is ai to Tableau what vlookup is to excel?

As Ben Thompson from Stratechery wrote on Google’s acquistion of Looker “data analytics and visualization is a large and growing segment in enterprise software”. As Boris Evelson from Forrester points out, BI tools have reached technological maturity in certain areas such as d”atabase connectivity and data ingestion, security, data visualization, and slice-and-dice OLAP capabilities”. At the same time he points out the lack of demand: Fifty-six percent of global data and analytics decision makers (seniority level of manager or above) say their firms are currently in the beginner stage of their insights-driven transformation. Further anecdotal evidence shows that enterprises use no more than 20% of their data for insights, and less than 20% of knowledge workers use enterprise BI applications, still preferring spreadsheets and other shadow IT approaches. The reasons are – as he points out – “the low maturity of the people/process/data”. BI-vendors are trying to solve this issue by extending their solutions into E2E-tools; Considers Pentaho’s integration with Lumada: Lumada’s focus is on covering the entire data lifecycle, from the integration of various data sources to the evaluation of video and IoT data in compliance with DSGVO regulations and their deployment in self-service applications. Pentaho’s plans for its

Data loading processing in the data warehouse to handle deletes

When you are populating your data vault, you might need to delete you stage-tables in an asynchronous way; load -> staging -> integration layer Only – and only – when you have populated the integration layer, you can delete the entries from your load table. One way to achieve this is to implement a delete-tracking-table that will track your deletes. The process is like this: Set up a metadata-table that contains: your target table and its source table After populating a table in the integration layer, you store this information in the delete-tracking-table. Concretely you track: the source table, the table in the integration layer, and the highest load date in your table in the integration layer Initiate the delete-process: for each source table defined in your metadata-table get the lowest load date from the delete-tracking-table. If there is no entry in your delete-tracking-table, use 1753 as a default. Delete every entry from your source table that is lower than this load date.

How Coinbase is building a crypto empire for users’ crypto lifecycles

Recently, Coinbase acquired task-platform Earn.com. Coinbase is an online platform for users and merchants to buy, sell, and accept cryptocurrencies. For these activities Coinbase has three different products: gdax exchange: buying and selling of cryptocurrencies for institutional and professional investors Coinbase.com: buying and selling of cryptocurrencies for „mainstream“ users Coinbase Commerce: merchants payment systems for accepting cryptocurrency payments Earn.com is a task-platform where users earn bitcoin for completing tasks. The tasks are offered by blockchain startups doing an ICO and involve things like signing up for newsletters or joining telegram groups. Those blockchain startups are very often in an early phase and Earn.com serves as a marketing tool for them. Some argue that the acquisition was an acqui-hire for Earn founder and CEO Balaji Srinivasan. And Balaji Srinivasan, who has an impressive track record (among other things as partner at Andreessen Horowitz) is now indeed Coinbase’s CTO. Whereas acqui-hiring Balaji Srinivasan might be the acquisition’s real intention, looking at the acquisition in the context of Coinbase’s other acquisitions and their self-imposed company description shows another perspective, namely that Coinbase is building a “crypto empire“ serving a user’s whole „crypto lifecycle“. Building a crypto empire with Earn.com, Cipher Browser, Coinbase.com, and

Thoughts on Stellar's Randos Per Week in the context of increased crypto awareness

In their “Stellar 2018 Roadmap” (see Thoughts on “Stellar 2018 Roadmap”) Stellar jokingly (at least I hope so) shared the critical indicator for a decentralized protocol” (original emphasis), namely randos per week (r.p.w or rpw; number of random people talking about crypto) and promised equally moonish growth. Although meant as a joke there is some truth in those numbers. The number of average — „non-crypto“ — people talking about it has — at least in my perception — increased in the last couple of weeks and months. More importantly, such popularity metrics are important for the diffusion of cryptoassets; the more people know about it, the greater the likelihood of acceptance. Nevertheless, the recently increased popularity of crypto is not without its caveats. Prevalence of common misconceptions hindering diffusion: Firstly, a lot of the attention is still on getting rich, Crypto being a bubble and people confusing all alts with Bitcoin. As long as these misconceptions prevail, crypto won’t reach mass market adoption. Creation of overhyped interest leading to bursting bubble: On the one side Blockchain and Co. are overhyped to be the next big thing and if possible right now. On the other side, adoption is either low or not perceived because it is happening under the hood. For instance, Stellar’s partnership with Tempo

Thoughts on Stellar’s Randos Per Week in the context of increased crypto awareness

In their “Stellar 2018 Roadmap” (see Thoughts on “Stellar 2018 Roadmap”) Stellar jokingly (at least I hope so) shared the critical indicator for a decentralized protocol” (original emphasis), namely randos per week (r.p.w or rpw; number of random people talking about crypto) and promised equally moonish growth. Although meant as a joke there is some truth in those numbers. The number of average — „non-crypto“ — people talking about it has — at least in my perception — increased in the last couple of weeks and months. More importantly, such popularity metrics are important for the diffusion of cryptoassets; the more people know about it, the greater the likelihood of acceptance. Nevertheless, the recently increased popularity of crypto is not without its caveats. Prevalence of common misconceptions hindering diffusion: Firstly, a lot of the attention is still on getting rich, Crypto being a bubble and people confusing all alts with Bitcoin. As long as these misconceptions prevail, crypto won’t reach mass market adoption. Creation of overhyped interest leading to bursting bubble: On the one side Blockchain and Co. are overhyped to be the next big thing and if possible right now. On the other side, adoption is either low or not perceived because it is happening under the hood. For instance, Stellar’s partnership with Tempo

Avoiding, Reporting, and Shilling: Three strategies towards crypto partnership reporting

It seems to me that most crypto projects follow one of three strategies in their reporting of relationships: Avoiding: Being quiet about partnerships Reporting: Being deliberate about partnerships Shilling: Using partnerships for shilling and pumping the price I have added shilling for the sake of completeness but its senseless practice and I won’t discuss it any further here. Avoiding and reporting stand in contrast to each other; on the one side avoiding ensures an over-focus on price but lowers trust and transparency. Reporting, on the other side, although not intended, can lead to unexplainable price increases but helps the project to gain momentum. Although – as so often – the truth lies somewhere between avoiding and reporting I believe that we will see more granularity in the future (different news will be handled differently) and most importantly I take the view that in the long-run the crypto world will adopt best practices from the non-crypto industry.

Two mental steps towards cryptoasset diffusion

I see diffusion of cryptoassets as a two-step process where we move from one mental model to the other. These models are: Acceptance of cryptoassets in general: Initially, people must accept the concept of cryptoassets per se. Acceptance of one particular cryptoasset. Secondly, once people understand cryptoassets and believe they are better than whatever they replace, people must accept that one particular coin for that one particular use case. Currently, we are at step one. Today’s cryptos are thus confronted with two tasks; convince people that their general idea makes sense and convince people that their particular implementation (i.e. their crypto) makes sense. For both, especially the first, a lot of resilience is required and many won’t have that. More importantly, however, is that once we have crossed step one newcomers could come in with their new implementation and successfully process step two based on the work of the previous generation.

Weekly crypto roundup: Stellar’s January roundup and Facebook Messenger and cryptocurrencies

Asset news: Stellar This week (February 5) Stellar published their 2018 January Roundup (check out here what Stellar is). The roundup contained: reference to Stellar and the State of Cryptocurrency reference to 2018 Stellar Technical Roadmap recap on Financial Institutions & Partners overview of upcoming events Stellar and the State of Cryptocurrency and Stellar’s 2018 Technical Roadmap I have covered Stellar and the State of Cryptocurrency here and Stellar’s Technical Roadmap here. Recap on Financial Institutions & Partners Termio, an „advertising blockchain” will run their ICO on Stellar. Scheduled for April. LaLa World will implement Stellar for international remittance Tontine Trust is creating a social security and pension system based on Stellar MOIN and TowerChain were announced as two Stellar Anchors (an Anchor within the Stellar-network is somebody who holds and issues assets). OpenGarden announced to run their tokens on Stellar (no ICO). OpenGarden has been around since 2011 and is backed by a couple of investors (total funding around $13). OpenGarden has created FireChat, a chat app that works without an Internet connection. Furthermore — and this is their primary goal — they are working on establishing a network of decentralized ISP (Internet service providers) allowing anybody to share their Wi-Fi to other OpenGarden users.

Thoughts on "Stellar and the State of Cryptocurrency"

In January Christian from Stellar published “Stellar and the State of Cryptocurrency“ (check out here what Stellar is). The report came out in January, at a time where the general market was going downward after doing quite the opposite in the months before or. The team shared the following updates: Transactions per second high but still below industry standard Stellar showed that they are aware of a need for marketing 2017 marked two years of Stellar being battle-tested In 2017 smart-contract functionality was added Bifrost was released Stellar merged several Go repositories into monorepo and there were 128 merged pull requests in 2017 XLM support added to Ledger Nano S See below for details. Relatively high transactions per second, low transaction fees, and marketing-consciousness They reported on their transactions per second (TPS) and transaction fees (tf). TPS, although relatively high, are still below current industry standard (e.g. Visa with around 2k). Also, according to them, they have the lowest average transaction fees compared to selected other cryptos. Crypto Platform Performance and Stellar specs (Source: Stellar) As I believe that the whole industry will convergence towards the same fees over time (the same applies to other technical specifications as well) I believe