Whenever people think about Google doing stuff like this, they often get freaked out. Like, "OMG Google is using me for its own benefit!"
Well, yes, that may be true. But the important thing to keep in mind is that you aren't losing anything here. Yes, Google may be using your GPS data to improve its maps. But that doesn't mean you are having any less fun playing the game because of it.
This is, I think, one of the things that's deeply fundamental to Google's culture and really great about the company: Google is always looking for non-zero sum solutions. Where many companies think, "What's the most I can take from my customers to make us money?" Google thinks, "How can we maximize the sum of both us and our users?"
Look at ads, for example. Where many sites are constantly playing, "what's the most ads I can cram into my site before people start leaving?", Google is thinking "how can we make the ads as relevant as possible so that users actually want them to be there?"
I used to be a rather paranoid "Big Brother" fearing type, but Google wins me over again and again with not only a user focus that attempts to win us over by being better than the alternatives in meaningful ways, but also by having a greater understanding of what we actually want.
It's kind of embarrassing how much of a fanboy I sound like these days, but I've just been endlessly impressed with their innovation.
As a side note, it was really awesome seeing something I wrote posted on HN. I feel like a real boy now.
When I worked there I was a bit surprised to learn that nearly the entire justification for their GOOG-411 service (a free directory service they have since shut down) was to develop tools for speech recognition. The context was constrained enough that you could 'guess' a lot and get a good result for the user but mostly they were interested comparing the way different people said different things to get access to pretty much every accent you could imagine. It was remarkably successful.
That they would use 'Ingress' to update Map information is right up there in terms of cleverness. You get to play an engaging game, they get (in the large) lots of valuable data about where things are exactly, and to some extent how their gear reports things relative to where they really are. So if you can recognize that this particular street has crappy GPS you can fill in by translating what you're seeing from the AGPRS chip and make it seem like it is right on the money.
It comes back to the ultimatum game http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimatum_game). Most people don't like others getting a better deal than themselves and will even choose to get nothing instead of something just so the other person also loses.
I had a similar thought after they released Google Now. Microsoft, Google, Apple, etc. all collect user data, but Google stands out in how hard they try to bring value to the user from all the data they have.
Google+ answered the question of how to get social signaling relevance in search values.
Really? First this answer has been known since the MySpace days at least -- and quite likely before then. Remember Google bought Orkut?
Google+ was more of a reaction against Facebook than some holistic answer to some problem that no one else could forsee. It was more like, "Google late to the game with a competitor that no one wants to use".
> first with the advent of email “conversation” threads
Google did not invent email conversations. Most email clients worth their salt could sort email based on thread since at least 1999/2000 (and also before that I only started using computers around that time).
The way Gmail groups and sorts conversations is not the same as the way a threaded email client does or did it. Here's a random example of the way almost all three-pane, graphical, threaded MUAs looked for years: http://img.brothersoft.com/screenshots/softimage/c/claws_mai...
Gmail did it differently and was considered innovative. Some people who had always used threaded readers hated and still hate it. Other people like it better, or never used the old way.
Perhaps, but none of the other webmail clients had that, and Outlook didn't. While it may have been an available feature, it certainly wasn't in any way widespread.
At the risk of incurring massive downvotes: if anyone happens to have a key for the game laying around, I would be very interested in getting one. I'm sitting on the edge of my chair, waiting for this game to go public. :D
No mention of local advertising? Google feels like it's behind on the whole "local" business compared to rivals like Yelp, and this would be one way to get people to use a location-aware Google app.
Really? I'd really consider Google Local to be a superior product to Yelp, and with the acquisition of Zagat, they've got all the street cred they need. Why do you think Yelp is still a concern?
When I started playing I saw that Resistance had more global control. I just checked, they still have (55% R to 45% E).
Anyway, in my case, the decision had several reasons. As far as the narrative goes I sided with Resistance, but thougth to myself: hell, it's time for a change. There was also a little bit of "transhumanists vs. bioconservatives" orangecat mentioned, and then maybe a little bit of: a) I got an invitation from a Resistance guy so I thougth going to the other team will be more fun, and b) I have small negative feelings toward Ada (because of the overblown popularity of A. Lovelace) and small positive feelings for Jarvis (AI from Iron Man movies!) :).
As somebody at my office put it: "Transhumanists versus bioconservatives...you have to ask?" But yeah, it would be nice to have some more resistance targets around.
Not in Australia :( It also says its not compatible with the Nexus S. But considering what I went through it work this out, I think it's just not in Australia yet.
Well, yes, that may be true. But the important thing to keep in mind is that you aren't losing anything here. Yes, Google may be using your GPS data to improve its maps. But that doesn't mean you are having any less fun playing the game because of it.
This is, I think, one of the things that's deeply fundamental to Google's culture and really great about the company: Google is always looking for non-zero sum solutions. Where many companies think, "What's the most I can take from my customers to make us money?" Google thinks, "How can we maximize the sum of both us and our users?"
Look at ads, for example. Where many sites are constantly playing, "what's the most ads I can cram into my site before people start leaving?", Google is thinking "how can we make the ads as relevant as possible so that users actually want them to be there?"