How long 'till we say "Guck Foogle" !?

rolion

Hi,

Just read few online articles about how Google has changed from original friendly company to a more aggressive and "dominant to be",trying to become Microsoft !
Few aspects that i remember:

-search algorythm adjusted...
-gmail 'adwords' results based on text
-limiting video searches only to YouTube
-Google + ad campaign
-toolbars in IE when downloading...Adobe !
-paying Firefix (open source) to have default page
-Android development and buying Motorola

and so on...

So my thought is when Google will become ... Microsoft !?
When they will cross the border from been "friendly" to been "money maker" !?
I mean ,now is OK, i use Google myself daily,but...is there a threat that i cannot see it !??

cookie1977

If and when they start charging for services like gmail etc... That's when I think so anyway.

ScumLord

rolion wrote: »

Hi,

Just read few online articles about how Google has changed from original friendly company to a more aggressive and "dominant to be",trying to become Microsoft !
Few aspects that i remember:

-search algorythm adjusted...
-gmail 'adwords' results based on text
-limiting video searches only to YouTube
-Google + ad campaign
-toolbars in IE when downloading...Adobe !
-paying Firefix (open source) to have default page
-Android development and buying Motorola

and so on...

I don't see what's wrong with any of that.

So my thought is when Google will become ... Microsoft !?
When they will cross the border from been "friendly" to been "money maker" !?

That line has been crossed a long long time ago.

dmw07

rolion wrote: »

Hi,

Just read few online articles about how Google has changed from original friendly company to a more aggressive and "dominant to be",trying to become Microsoft !
Few aspects that i remember:

-search algorythm adjusted...
-gmail 'adwords' results based on text
-limiting video searches only to YouTube
-Google + ad campaign
-toolbars in IE when downloading...Adobe !
-paying Firefix (open source) to have default page
-Android development and buying Motorola

and so on...

So my thought is when Google will become ... Microsoft !?
When they will cross the border from been "friendly" to been "money maker" !?
I mean ,now is OK, i use Google myself daily,but...is there a threat that i cannot see it !??

Was thinking the exact same thing since google started to tailor web results based on the user, storing said information and distributing it to third parties. You might not think that's a problem, but coming from a computing background that dabbled in data, i know the amount of resources you need to do such a thing correctly. With all that information also comes great responsibility. And there is little or no legal protection for users in relation to this area. How google decides to use this data is irrelevant. The fact they have carte blanche on that decision makes me paranoid

Then Chrome and android were marketed in pretty much the same way as microsofts ie. Free for all until people become dependent on it. This is the hook in the fishes mouth. Does anyone actually use the internet without a search engine these days? Most people i know, think google IS the internet.

For me, it's all about the direction the company wants to go. They became powerful by offering great services at a very low cost/Free. If they, like microsoft start to abuse the influence they have gained by turning on it's loyal customers/users, then they will go the way of microsoft. Albeit after a stint of successful dominance and abuse of the market.

So far, google still has huge market credit in my eyes and are not the evil company many would have you believe, but they are not as clean as their image suggests. All i can say is, thank jeebus that Mr.Jobs never had anything to do with google. That much information and power in the hands of a narcissistic, capitalist abusing, perfectionist(Control freak), would have me turning my back on the internets ;-)

dmw07

ScumLord wrote: »

-search algorythm adjusted...
-gmail 'adwords' results based on text
-limiting video searches only to YouTube
-Google + ad campaign
-toolbars in IE when downloading...Adobe !
-paying Firefix (open source) to have default page
-Android development and buying Motorola

I don't see what's wrong with any of that.

I see flashing lights tbh.

-gmail adwords. Cheers, i want to be a little advertisement bunny for google.
-Youtube. What happened to fair play. There are other video sources.
-google+. Spammed half the world to join it, then fudged the statistics to make it seem like people were actually using it.
-paying Firefox. This is trying to get an edge on your competitor by spamming users of a free software tool. I stopped using Firefox over this. They abandoned their core belief. Nobody should tell you what search engine, especially third party, to use. This ain't microsoft.

So i see plenty to think about.

Odaise Gaelach

Their company motto is "Don't be evil". Of course they're up to something!

Statistician

cookie1977 wrote: »

If and when they start charging for services like gmail etc... That's when I think so anyway.

They already do effectively 'charge' for such services.
You are paying with your data.

User data is the most valuable asset google has. They have warehouses of data.


Google has a scary amount of data about me on their servers. All my emails going back years, and also what I've been searching for on the internet and which videos I've watched in youtube etc...

I'll be moving away from them over the next few weeks.

Khannie

dmw07 wrote: »

-gmail adwords. Cheers, i want to be a little advertisement bunny for google.

That's the price you pay to get all the free stuff tbh.

dmw07 wrote: »

-Youtube. What happened to fair play. There are other video sources.

They don't claim to return fair results. I suppose we're all free to use a different search engine. I'd consider that.

dmw07 wrote: »

-google+. Spammed half the world to join it, then fudged the statistics to make it seem like people were actually using it.

Nothing any other company wouldn't do really.

dmw07 wrote: »

-paying Firefox. This is trying to get an edge on your competitor by spamming users of a free software tool. I stopped using Firefox over this. They abandoned their core belief. Nobody should tell you what search engine, especially third party, to use. This ain't microsoft.

They don't prevent you doing anything. They just give google the default spot for the kind of money that allows them to continue developing. If you want to use another search engine it's 20 seconds of effort on your part to facilitate that.

It's not free for firefox to offer whatever bazillion downloads a day they get. Bandwidth, build servers, test servers and serving servers all cost cold, hard cash. That's before you even consider hiring anyone to work full time on the project. They have to get money from somewhere.

In answer to the OP: Of course google are trying to beat the competition. Aggressively. Why wouldn't they? My company does. Doesn't yours?

dmw07

Khannie wrote: »

That's the price you pay to get all the free stuff tbh.

I agree to a point but i think you miss something. They save information, keywords from your mail. Saved over time, metrics and statistics are used to calculate the things you like which in turn is used to find the best suitable store/shop/seller for y.....eh look this is too long to go through Ok, i agree with your statement. It's valid enough. I get free stuff therefore anyone can bombard this free service with ad's. Tailored to me.

Khannie wrote: »

They don't claim to return fair results. I suppose we're all free to use a different search engine. I'd consider that.

Anti-competitive springs to mind.

Khannie wrote: »

They don't prevent you doing anything.

Never said that but ok, go on.

Khannie wrote: »

Nothing any other company wouldn't do really.

Really. OK.

Khannie wrote: »

They just give google the default spot for the kind of money that allows them to continue developing.

You make is sound like Firefox needed the money, vital funding to continue. They didn't. They have plenty of financial backers. I fail to see your point.

Khannie wrote: »

It's not free for firefox to offer whatever bazillion downloads a day they get. Bandwidth, build servers, test servers and serving servers all cost cold, hard cash. That's before you even consider hiring anyone to work full time on the project. They have to get money from somewhere.

I agree to a degree. It is expensive, the company do need cash to fund their expenses and most importantly, to pay their workers. Wikipedia somehow manage to do it without selling out so much, although they don't have a lot of registered employees. Donations by the consumers would be one way to go, than signing a binding agreement with a third party, that makes it compulsory for the users to use a certain search engine, WITHOUT changing the settings. Which for the majority of people using computers, is a challenge. I've worked on enough helpdesks to know that about Irish users. And as i've said, Firefox is not in trouble financially.

Khannie wrote: »

In answer to the OP: Of course google are trying to beat the competition. Aggressively. Why wouldn't they? My company does. Doesn't yours?

Capitalism like this does not foster evolution of ideas, design and technology. It makes greedy people, want more money. It's drive is towards money/directors, not people/consumers.

Which is exactly the opposite of Google and it's philosophy and is one of the main reasons people went to google over others in the first place.

Nothingbetter2d

dont worry keano reaves aka neo will come reset the matrix pretty soon and we can start all over again

dmw07

Nothingbetter2d wrote: »

dont worry keano reaves aka neo will come reset the matrix pretty soon and we can start all over again

I have seen a lot of black cats recently

ScumLord

dmw07 wrote: »

-gmail adwords. Cheers, i want to be a little advertisement bunny for google.

I still don't see the problem, they're not intrusive and most the time I don't even know they're there, I think they're a waste of money to be honest.

dmw07 wrote: »

I agree to a point but i think you miss something. They save information, keywords from your mail. Saved over time, metrics and statistics are used to calculate the things you like which in turn is used to find the best suitable store/shop/seller for y.....eh look this is too long to go through Ok, i agree with your statement. It's valid enough. I get free stuff therefore anyone can bombard this free service with ad's. Tailored to me.

It's not so much google are saving this data, that data is out there being saved all the time, you can't do anything with a computer without the computer saving a record of that happening. Google are just making use of that data. It's not like they know us all by name or give a fiddlers what we do.



Google came up with excellent products and that's why people use them, I always thought Microsoft made pretty good products too but as soon as people see no worth in what your making your doomed, it doesn't matter how big or how well funded you are, if the company believes it's entitled or above the masses then it will fall just like any other company.

Google has a huge target on it's back it will be doing well to stay on top. Now companies know their weaknesses and are trying to target those weaknesses for their own gain and it doesn't matter how good or well meaning any company is now once they get into Google or Microsofts position they'll turn into corporate bastards, it's just what money does.

opinion guy

rolion wrote: »

So my thought is when Google will become ... MicrosoftApple !?

Fixed that for you

dmw07

ScumLord wrote: »

Google are just making use of that data.

Re:Ad's. I've disabled them several times now. Every new agreement i sign, they come back. Annoying having to take them off is all.

Just talking to a mate about the quote above, legality of data and the use of data by companies in computing came into the conversation.

Just run with me for a minute;
If, for instance a shop keeper saved CCTV footage of me, for longer than 2 years and used it to build up a character (Faux or real) of me and what i like. Then used that information to target me, to knowingly or hopefully take my money by exchange of goods, where would i stand in relation to the law?

Reason i'm waffling is there is little or no law around it. The only thing that stops google from being those "corporate bastards", is google. They are effectively policing, themselves. So it's back to my main point really. What google does, it up to google.

ScumLord

dmw07 wrote: »

Just run with me for a minute;
If, for instance a shop keeper saved CCTV footage of me, for longer than 2 years and used it to build up a character (Faux or real) of me and what i like. Then used that information to target me, to knowingly or hopefully take my money by exchange of goods, where would i stand in relation to the law?

I'm sure if they could do that easily they would, all they want is your money. But it's not as sinister as them building a case to put you into disrepute but they could essentially save the same information. It's not as personal either, the shop would know you and have to employ someone to watch you, it would be a person watching a person. A person is open to all sorts of bias but with Google it's a computer watching you and treating your data with complete indifference. It's only taking input and spitting out results.

Reason i'm waffling is there is little or no law around it. The only thing that stops google from being those "corporate bastards", is google. They are effectively policing, themselves. So it's back to my main point really. What google does, it up to google.

I suppose that's just the side effects of being on the cutting edge of technological advances. They're creating a new world and the law has barely woken up to the new world we all live in.

dmw07

ScumLord wrote: »

I'm sure if they could do that easily they would, all they want is your money

Yeah, they want cash. But they can't profile you without your consent. Facial recognition is good enough, the laws on stalking, keeping records of people without their consent are also good enough to deter companies. Digital data, there is little or no law in relation to this.

ScumLord wrote: »

It's a computer watching you and treating your data with complete indifference.

I used to write case matrices and code for a company, to overcome such a problem. That was 4 years ago. I was/am a poor coder and i was not the first to try it either. It was relatively successful. We had the full co-operation of the customers though.

ScumLord wrote: »

I suppose that's just the side effects of being on the cutting edge of technological advances. They're creating a new world and the law has barely woken up to the new world we all live in.

I think you are right there. We are a victim of incomparable changes in law and technology.

Right, i'm off down the shop to buy a crunchie. That google ad banner for one is tempting me

ScumLord

dmw07 wrote: »

I used to write case matrices and code for a company, to overcome such a problem. That was 4 years ago. I was/am a poor coder and i was not the first to try it either. It was relatively successful. We had the full co-operation of the customers though.

You wrote code that turned a computer into a biggot?

Dude111

ScumLord wrote:

I don't see what's wrong with any of that.

The ones who are MOST AFFECTED by google are unfortunetly those of us that live IN THE USA!! (Where they are trying to get all info they can and collect it)

D

dmw07 wrote: »

Re:Ad's. I've disabled them several times now. Every new agreement i sign, they come back. Annoying having to take them off is all.

Just talking to a mate about the quote above, legality of data and the use of data by companies in computing came into the conversation.

Just run with me for a minute;
If, for instance a shop keeper saved CCTV footage of me, for longer than 2 years and used it to build up a character (Faux or real) of me and what i like. Then used that information to target me, to knowingly or hopefully take my money by exchange of goods, where would i stand in relation to the law?

Reason i'm waffling is there is little or no law around it. The only thing that stops google from being those "corporate bastards", is google. They are effectively policing, themselves. So it's back to my main point really. What google does, it up to google.

Most shops already do this. Loyalty cards are used to collect what you buy and when you buy.

I remember seeing an article how shops noticed at a particular time there was a surge in beer and nappies on friday evenings. It turned out that husbands coming home at the weekend and the wives were calling and asking them to pick up nappies some were buying some beer.

What the shop did was move the beer and nappies closer so that more husbands would see and buy beer. Sales of beer went up 40%.

dmw07

D wrote: »

Most shops already do this. Loyalty cards are used to collect what you buy and when you buy.

I remember seeing an article how shops noticed at a particular time there was a surge in beer and nappies on friday evenings. It turned out that husbands coming home at the weekend and the wives were calling and asking them to pick up nappies some were buying some beer.

What the shop did was move the beer and nappies closer so that more husbands would see and buy beer. Sales of beer went up 40%.

Ah that's trend analysis at a higher level, i think you speak of. We did that with purely the epos receipt from the till. You can do that without the customers notice as you are not personally identifying with their purchase. It's at an aggregated and anonymised level.

What i'm talking about, targets YOU. Whether or not YOU buy a beer and nappies on Friday at 6.21:23 on 30th September with a €50 note.

As for the loyalty cards, they are a great linkage. We never linked a purchase with a person, unless we had written consent to do so. When we started to matrix a persons purchasing habit we found some amazing information about them. Scary actually.

Khannie

dmw07 wrote: »

When we started to matrix a persons purchasing habit we found some amazing information about them. Scary actually.

Sounds interesting...tell me more.

dmw07

Khannie wrote: »

Sounds interesting...tell me more.

I'll send you a pm.

thirtythirty

I'd be interested to hear people's proposals for where they are moving to when they leave Google, and how they think it will be any different (apart from the poorer quality service). I'm quite sure Bing or Yahoo don't store information of any sort :pac:

As for the CCTV anecdote, I personally would be delighted if Tesco analysed all their CCTV of me and moved everything I liked, and everything I might like, to beside the front door. That'd save me wading through the cr@p I know I definitely don't want just to find the things I do want, and also give me the option to go beyond "my stuff" to find new things if I so decide to.

It's also interesting to see people's varying definition of being evil. Where someone arguing it's "evil" to promote Google+ on Google ;I'd wonder if they'd call it evil if 820 Cabs had a sticker on their dashboard promoting a new service they had because they "should really have a sticker from all the cab companies in the interest of fairness". I personally would call it leveraging your service, as is normal business practice.

I also guess challenging the Chinese government and refusing to bow to government censorship of Google search results doesn't constitute an act of their "don't be evil" mantra.

Volovo

This is a really interesting thread!

Then Chrome and android were marketed in pretty much the same way as microsofts ie. Free for all until people become dependent on it. This is the hook in the fishes mouth

Thats one of the things I am afraid of, just how dependant we are all becoming on google, and what they decide to do with that dependancy.

I use:
Google Search
Google Maps
(Google) Android
Google Chrome
Gmail
Google Docs
Youtube
Google News
Google Plus
and Google Translate.

What about when google wallet becomes everybody's choice of payment? Google Drive is google's version of dropbox, I will probably start using that too.

It is a fantastically innovative company, and all of products and services are top notch. They offer the user a brilliant service, but at what cost? Our privacy?

In one way I don't mind certain ads being tailored to me, but I am afraid of just how powerful google is with all of that information about me. What if it falls into the wrong hands?

Volovo

spottyelephant wrote: »

That'd save me wading through the cr@p I know I definitely don't want just to find the things I do want, and also give me the option to go beyond "my stuff" to find new things if I so decide to.

I agree with everything in your post but think about this, are you really making the decision to "find new things"? Or is it the company that knows you so well placing a product right under your nose so you'll buy it, even though before you walked into the shop you didn't know you wanted it?

thirtythirty

Volovo wrote: »

I agree with everything in your post but think about this, are you really making the decision to "find new things"? Or is it the company that knows you so well placing a product right under your nose so you'll buy it, even though before you walked into the shop you didn't know you wanted it?

I can only speak for myself, but categorically yes!

Every so often I get a "spending itch" and decide to buy a new toy, and at that point I start my broad search/thinking of *everything* to see what I'm going to treat myself to. Outside of that I literally only buy the normal/necessity items.

dmw07

Volovo wrote: »

just how dependant we are all becoming on google

Go to a pub quiz night anywhere near you. Do you remember a time when the people that had the best phones didn't win because they had the fastest processor?

Humans retaining information is becoming a thing of the past. This is not such a bad thing, we just have to be aware of it.

Digital data retrieval and storage laws are non existent but that is not to say that the data is being used for anything other than capitalist conglomerates manipulative monetary extraction of finance on a sheep based species spoon feed what they do and don't like.

Not everyone is materialistic though, so a lot of data is pointless. I wouldn't be too worried about google using your data. They have been actively selling it for years. Nothing bad has happened so far.

BostonB

I just find the whole thing annoying. I don't want my phone numbers on facebook, I don't want my gmail email addresses on my phone. When I swap the sim in a phone I don't want it to enable mobile data then every app start updating, downloading data. If my gmail gets compromised, I don't want it to compromise every other online service I have. I don't want people who have my gmail, know what I watch on youtube.

It would be different if these companies made it easy and transparent to control who sees what, and which service shares with what. But too often they make subtle changes, buried in some menu 3 levels deep, and always bias to share information than block it.

I love technology. But I want to control it, not be dictated to by it.

Torqay

BostonB wrote: »

I love technology. But I want to control it, not be dictated to by it.

Your hopes are in vain.

Between 2011 and 2016 the amount of mobile data traffic will grow at a compound annual rate of 78 percent as the number of mobile devices connected to the Internet exceeds the number of people on Earth in four years' time, according to a study by Cisco Systems Inc.

By then, machines & AI will become more important than humans as the economic driver.

With technological evolution faster than biological evolution, in another 5 or 10 years time, there will be machines that are more "intelligent" than human beings.

Then the scene will be set for machines to control human beings.

And the Google machine could well be the mothership.

BostonB

LOL good point!

I had the experience of being without the internet, TV, and mobile phone, for a few weeks, and using a basic phone for a while I just enjoyed it so much, I've kinda been opting out of social media and such lately. Good for the soul.

ScumLord

dmw07 wrote: »

Ah that's trend analysis at a higher level, i think you speak of. We did that with purely the epos receipt from the till. You can do that without the customers notice as you are not personally identifying with their purchase.

When I signed up for my loyalty card thingie they took my name, address and telephone number, I don't see how they couldn't link your purchases to you and then use that information to send you coupons.

Khannie

Interesting side article about Target and their data mining.....

How Target Figured Out A Teen Girl Was Pregnant Before Her Father Did.

Interesting reading.

Torqay

Those who think, fully automated dairy farms are the pinnacle of machines controlling life forms may want to think again. It won't stop there, you know...

Dude111

Khannie wrote:

Interesting side article about Target and their data mining.....

Interesting reading.

Yes it is bud which is why I ONLY USE CASH!! (I value my privacy)

geordief

what would be a good alternative to Google?

I don't think search results are based on a correct relevance now.

Could search rankings be arrived at by some sort of a consensus between the users (a la Wikipedia?)-and how could abuse of search ranking be combatted and the whole thing financed (by the UN?) ?

As I recall (and which turned me to Google at the outset )its simplicity of searching was its main advantage -then.

PS should this be a sticky?

BostonB

I've tried a few other search engines and none are as good as Google unfortunately.

tricky D

Interesting article http://battellemedia.com/archives/2012/03/why-hath-google-forsaken-us-a-meditation.php on the relationship between Google and users with comparison to the more ominous methods of Apple and FaceBook.

dmw07

ScumLord wrote: »

When I signed up for my loyalty card thingie they took my name, address and telephone number, I don't see how they couldn't link your purchases to you and then use that information to send you coupons.

Not legally they can't. Not unless you signed a wavier which you more than likely did when "signing" up to be a member.;)

dmw07

geordief wrote: »

what would be a good alternative to Google?

I don't think search results are based on a correct relevance now.

Could search rankings be arrived at by some sort of a consensus between the users (a la Wikipedia?)-and how could abuse of search ranking be combatted and the whole thing financed (by the UN?) ?

As I recall (and which turned me to Google at the outset )its simplicity of searching was its main advantage -then.

PS should this be a sticky?

Which products are you speaking about? google+, docs, gmail, search engine?

I don't use g+ or facebook. I figured out bebo and opted out of the social experience.

Google docs i use on occasion but tend to use openoffice more.

Gmail i use, also hotmail, my uni account, and a few other accounts which i tested and never use. BUt here is a decent link to give you an option of what is out there; http://www.techsupportalert.com/best-free-email-client.htm

As for a search engine, i love google i have to say. That Irish one Cuil was great, just never got off the ground. Opera i find decent also.

I use Chrome or Firefox with extensions/Addons such at Adblock, NoScript and Ghostery. It negates a lot of information being read by google analytic's etc.

_AVALANCHE_

dmw07 wrote: »

As for a search engine, i love google i have to say. That Irish one Cuil was great, just never got off the ground. Opera i find decent also.

I was trying to think of their name the other night for aggggges!

http://techcrunch.com/2010/09/19/cuils-fails-acquired/

http://www.engadget.com/2012/02/21/google-buys-cuils-search-related-patent-applications/

The google killer got owned.

Torqay

geordief wrote: »

what would be a good alternative to Google?

Ixquick for me.

Or Startpage (pretty much the same as Ixquick, but limited to results from G00gle websearch only).

Dude111

I wonder if this engine is good.....

www.5earch.com