I was on a 56k dial up connection, but the page loaded so quickly.
This was during a period I was used to pages taking 20+ seconds to load, and the google homepage loaded almost instantly.
In fact, just for fun, I went to google.com on my new laptop with ssd and 16 gig of ram using the latest version of chrome, and maybe it is through rose tinted glasses, but it seems like the first time I visited google using my dial up connection it loaded a lot "snappier" than it does today.
Many people in my country still believe that Google == Internet so I am pretty sure that if Google stops serving for whatever reason here the majority of people will get cut out of the Internet because they don't understand how to use the address bar. I have even seen people accessing google.com just to put facebook.com in the search form instead of simply typing that domain in the address bar, I cringe every time.
Now plenty of websites make my Macbook's fans start.
I think google's backend is starting to look like yahoo's front-end. IME, their sites are getting slow and bloated.
Anyway, Google's pretty snappy for me just now, and I'm on a so-so connection.
Hilariously enough, the site is up and running now and still offers pretty good results.
Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
I was under the impression that most mining is now done by a few groups using special purpose hardware. Mining using hardware bought with "pocket money" seems like a losing game at this point.
> It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance.
It makes me sad that so much energy is wasted computing hashes for mining when it seems to add so little to society. In comparison, I think hosting holiday photos is a more valuable task.
> I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it.
I'm not sure why Google would give their hardware to a random group of miners. I'm not sure why the miners would want it either since x86 is not an efficient way to mine. Out of date x86 hardware especially.
A “blockchain” is a type of distributed data structure, there's not just The Blockchain, unless you're specifically talking about Bitcoin, in which case I don't know why you wouldn't refer to it specifically.
> and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware.
You're either suggesting that Google run Bitcoin nodes in their datacentres (which defeats Bitcoin's decentralisation), or that Google should make hardware specifically for Bitcoin.
Given Google is all about centralised, non-anonymised data they can mine for ad targeting, what exactly would appeal to them about Bitcoin?
Sure, there might be better uses for some of Google's servers, arguably, but why would “changing the direction of finance” require that? Aren't proposals like Bitcoin usually based on decentralisation?
Why would Google give away free servers to Bitcoin enthusiasts? What possible business incentive could there be? If they're just being nice, then why to Bitcoiners, of all people? Bitcoin (and systems using the same proof-of-work chain design) is an extremely wasteful user of energy and would not put such systems to good use.
> I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google.
Much more likely that Google would simply close its online services on you without a token of gratitude to its users.
> Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish.
You're forgetting the astronomical energy requirements for Bitcoin mining.
> Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?
Post-Snowden, pro-privacy services are essentially the antithesis of Google's business model. If Google can't read your chats, they can't scan them for keywords.
By the way I've always had the idea of a credibility plugin to a browser that rates the credibility level of everything you visit.
Sometimes I judge someone based on how they search. If they're typing out a whole question, perfect punctuation: not a good sign.
You read the Google instructions "How to use Google" about 15 years ago, and you started using Google when they had a 10 word limit, with no substitutions and no stemming.
Nowadays Google is mostly used by people who ask whole questions, complete with punctuation, and websites and Google optimise for those people.
Sometimes it's the best way to get to a good website.
Also sometimes when I search I don't know exactly what I'm looking for, so it takes a few queries to learn the basic vocabulary of the area I want to learn about. So putting a few keyword guesses into the box seems to work. In other words I never expect to land on a good website on my first try because I don't even know the right vocabulary.
Is there a better way to do it?
Who knows? Google used to tell people how to search. SEO arseholes ruined it for everyone, and now Google has an opaque mechanism.
If I don't kno much abotu something asking a full question seems to get useful introductory pages. If I know a bit about something keywords seems to work. I'm I know a lot about something I have to include "exact" words, and use the - to remove some not relevant terms.
Google went from being a precision tool to good enough most of the time.
Try "How far away is the Moon?".
Then try "How big is it?". Google even knows how to handle the pronoun "it".
But I think this mostly works for facts, as opposed to finding websites.
2) "ms sql regex"
I'm sure google is moving towards the first working just fine but for a very long time only the second didn't give you a bunch of garbage.
I am sure you can do better than that
The second big Google moment I remember was when Gmail first came out. I wanted an invite so bad and eventually got one. I thought how cool is this that you can have a usable email client in the web browser. Not that it was the first one; I remember using Hotmail before that. But it had threaded messages!
Of all the tech companies I've used in the past Google has treated me the best. They've done some unforgivable things like killing Google Reader but for the most part I'm happy with them.
The internet has changed, and reader is one of those things that is solidly in the past.
But in general, most people get their news from social media now - mostly Facebook as it turns out. That is hardly a disputable fact. RSS is a technical detail of how sites publish, and in the end, people seem to not care about it. They care about end user features, which apparently includes their friends commenting. And that is what Facebook does.
Yeah you could make an argument that Google Reader killed the promising RSS market, but I don't think that argument really holds a lot of water.
Looking forward to the next 18 years! Happy birthday, Google!
[Title: When is Google’s birthday? The big thing wrong with the search engine's celebratory doodle]
Today: Google is the new MS. XMPP kicked out of Google Talk, RSS put on a hold. If there wasn't Firefox, Chromium would be burried. I'd even wish that Bing would be more successful, let alone DuckDuckGo.
... which furthers their eco-system and cements "vendor lock-in". They kill off too many major projects seemingly for purely financial purposes for the point you make to carry well.
Today: All your data are belong to us.
Today: Feel the power of the dark side.
I suppose DuckDuckGo with !g is a better version of that now anyway but it was always an interesting concept...
If I recall correctly.
Now: An interner super power
My story for all who are interested:
In 2004 the director of the Austria Press Agency (APA) came to me and said "Hey, our PR customers wan't to find their press releases in Google, do that!" I was in web business development then, a fancy name for a one man team of developer, coder, hacker, sysadmin, product development, cooperations, conceptionist, designer, data analyst, external contributors coordinator for www.ots.at, the public relations branch of APA.
I did, and it worked. As a matter of fact it worked so good, that for some time the press releases of the companies showed up before the actual websites of the companies. (I used such advanced and then highly controversial strategies like internal interlinking and title-tags) Traffic and soon later revenue exploded.
As I was frustrated with web development at that time (IE6 had a market share of 90% plus, FF (firebird or phoenix at that time) wasn't ready yet, no competition anywhere near). Web 2.0. was just starting at that time, we saw what was possible, but we could not do it, as the IE6 bugs were crashing all innovation.
I could code since I was a child, then I made code my work, now I swore to myself that I will always ever code for fun (or projects that are 100% owned by me and therefore fun) again, but earn money in another way.
I followed the money and started my first company "Search Engine Optimized distribution of PR and Corporate Information via Blog and Web 2.0. Networks" in 2006 i think. Today we would call it a "Corporate Blog"!
I created a piece of software that was from the front end better than WordPress of that time, faster, bug free HTML, W3C valid, beautiful tag clouds, just awesome. The backend and the actual getting content in there was a complete mess, so what, I had a product!!!! Now I just needed to sell the product, cold calling companies and convince them that they need a corporate blog and that their content needs to get found by Google. Oh yeah, zero sales experience from my side. Lets just say it didn't work.
So I did what any young founder would do: went to a party, jumped over a wall to save entrance fee, broke my knee in a very complicated way and went into hospital for 3 months.
I took a job again: This time as a key account manager to sell websites in the real estate business. I learned a lot, most horrible job ever, too.
Went to the next job, now officially called myself SEO for the first time: becoming the SEO manager of the then world leader in sports-betting, poker and casino. Oh what fun! For the first time I realized what unbelievable esoteric bullshit people started to believe about Google and SEO. High-up management talked about "PageRank Black Holes" whereby I explained to them that "Google being able to crawl us" is kinda a good idea if you want to get found for anything. Also I had months long projects to convince the powers to be, that it just isn't a good idea to run internal links over 16 (internal & external ) redirects (whereby IE which was still around at that time only supported 10...). I had 70 people working on changing the footer links (as they were owned by different departments and country managers). Learned a lot in those years, especially about working with consultants and other third parties brought in by country managers, product heads, other consultants, bought companies, ...
And I learned that the state of SEO, which was a dev driven discipline for a long time became the ultimate bullshit industry. With people selling links that suck, selling tools that nobody needs, telling stuff that could neither verified nor falsified, hurting businesses until the point of bankruptcy. And whenever I though SEO has arrived at a new bottom, it became worse.
Then I did what any employee which was fed up with the status quo did, I joined a startup. Well not one, an incubator which owned the majority of all the startups it incubated. I.e.: I helped scale 123people form about 300 000 monthly to 60 000 000 monthly visits before it was sold. And some others which I'm more proud of. Then joined another startup.
In 2011 I started my second company, my goal is simple: To make all SEO agencies, including my own, redundant. I'm doing great, it's still lots of fun.
So anyway, thx Google. You gave me a career. I work in the world/economy you created.
Interesting story. But in that last line you make it sound like without Google you didn't have a career :)
20+ years of being online. Google was a welcome change when they launched, but they've been on a path of slow credibility erosion for much of the last decade. IMHO.