Google, a darling in particular of the childish PC-tech liberals, is overrated. It's a tool and a means to an end, that's all. We can do without their smug leftism like "Don't be evil" when they are hypocrites who at the same time fly an energy-guzzling modified airliner for their personal transportation. (I wonder if they have ever flown that out to visit Al Gore in the Gores' enormous energy-guzzling mansion, so they can all enjoy their fake-superiority illusion together. Hmmm.)
Where Google made interesting news recently was with what its chief (a darling of the left) had to say about what's in the future. It's actually nothing other than a real-world money-making opportunity, which is, for example, also at the heart of T. Boone Pickens's "benevolent" alternative-energy (and water supply delivery) project. (The money's in the water.) Google's chief had said something interesting, which was that he wanted to make Google smarter about identifying characteristics about the users, so as to replace the old-fashioned (guess-right-hopefully-and-) broadcast model for advertising with advertising that was specifically intended for individual users, based on their on-line behavior, purchases, other indications of preferences, hobbies, et cetera. This would mean the right kind of advertising, for the right kind of products, could be aimed specifically at each user. This would of course revolutionize advertising and greatly increase its effectiveness, in theory -- and of course, "revolutionize" the ad-charge revenues Google could (and would) reap.
GreenDreams
· 6 months ago
DLS you're just spittin mad today and full of piss and vinegar. Get some rest.
Google is a remarkable company that has revolutionized the internet search. Their success is not surprising. Having used just about every search engine, the ability of Google to bring relevant results to the top just crushed the competition. Too bad they got all police state on us and track everything we do, sell us out to advertisers and kowtow to repressive regimes like China. They'd be wise to rethink those things, which are enabling their competitors.
"Manipulating their results" is one way to put it, but there's a business in giving Google-style search capabilities without the big brother aspects. This has spawned several "Google scrapers" that use Google for searching, but protect searchers from Google-eye. My favorite is Scroogle at www.scroogle.org
DLS
· 6 months ago
"DLS you're just spittin mad today and full of piss and vinegar. Get some rest."
I'm only annoyed at the idiocy I encounter in a all-too-frequently-ever-more-dumbed-down society, when I stop to think about the ways in which it can be, and is, so often dumbed-down.
The "revolution in advertising" is simple and logical (though it adds another concern you may have about Big Brother; after all, knowing what you buy, implying _learning_ what you buy, is one item the chief mentioned specifically), and I wonder what kind of progress he and they (at Google) will make on this.
"Too bad they got all police state on us and track everything we do, sell us out to advertisers and kowtow to repressive regimes like China."
Their silly leftism was also accompanied by this and other hypocrisies -- it's annoying _and_ laughable.
scorpion68
· 6 months ago
DLS......get a life will you? The Big G is the best. Period. And they will get bigger and better and will make moe a more money. That`s why I invest with them.
All Comments
Where Google made interesting news recently was with what its chief (a darling of the left) had to say about what's in the future. It's actually nothing other than a real-world money-making opportunity, which is, for example, also at the heart of T. Boone Pickens's "benevolent" alternative-energy (and water supply delivery) project. (The money's in the water.) Google's chief had said something interesting, which was that he wanted to make Google smarter about identifying characteristics about the users, so as to replace the old-fashioned (guess-right-hopefully-and-) broadcast model for advertising with advertising that was specifically intended for individual users, based on their on-line behavior, purchases, other indications of preferences, hobbies, et cetera. This would mean the right kind of advertising, for the right kind of products, could be aimed specifically at each user. This would of course revolutionize advertising and greatly increase its effectiveness, in theory -- and of course, "revolutionize" the ad-charge revenues Google could (and would) reap.
Google is a remarkable company that has revolutionized the internet search. Their success is not surprising. Having used just about every search engine, the ability of Google to bring relevant results to the top just crushed the competition. Too bad they got all police state on us and track everything we do, sell us out to advertisers and kowtow to repressive regimes like China. They'd be wise to rethink those things, which are enabling their competitors.
"Manipulating their results" is one way to put it, but there's a business in giving Google-style search capabilities without the big brother aspects. This has spawned several "Google scrapers" that use Google for searching, but protect searchers from Google-eye. My favorite is Scroogle at www.scroogle.org
I'm only annoyed at the idiocy I encounter in a all-too-frequently-ever-more-dumbed-down society, when I stop to think about the ways in which it can be, and is, so often dumbed-down.
The "revolution in advertising" is simple and logical (though it adds another concern you may have about Big Brother; after all, knowing what you buy, implying _learning_ what you buy, is one item the chief mentioned specifically), and I wonder what kind of progress he and they (at Google) will make on this.
"Too bad they got all police state on us and track everything we do, sell us out to advertisers and kowtow to repressive regimes like China."
Their silly leftism was also accompanied by this and other hypocrisies -- it's annoying _and_ laughable.
The Big G is the best. Period. And they will get bigger and better and will make moe a more money.
That`s why I invest with them.