Why Google is a necessary evil
-
Just like the People's Republic of China... who'll probably end up buying everything we used to own! Must start brushing up on my Chinese. Is Mandarin or Cantonese the dominant lingo in Mother China? :)
martin_hughes wrote:
Is Mandarin or Cantonese the dominant lingo in Mother China?
I believe there are three languages spoken universally: cash; check; or money order. One phrase that does not seem to be understood, however, is "You have sold me poisoned goods."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
martin_hughes wrote:
Is Mandarin or Cantonese the dominant lingo in Mother China?
I believe there are three languages spoken universally: cash; check; or money order. One phrase that does not seem to be understood, however, is "You have sold me poisoned goods."
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
:D We best stop now before we get berated for bringing the SB into the Lounge...
-
Google started with the motto 'Do No Evil', and while their application of this policy may be in question by some, and while they are undoubtedly a monopoly when it comes to search (and getting close when it comes to online advertising) I have to say I'm happy they will not let the big dogs stick to their old tricks Google Wants Open Access Pledge from Verizon[^] "Verizon is not free to self-define the rule to exclude any and all Verizon devices," the filing reads. "The commission must ensure that Verizon understands that this license obligation means what it says: any apps, any devices." Excellent.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
This statement has been puzzling me. Isn't it supposed to read: "Verizon is not free to self-define the rule to exclude any and all **non-**Verizon devices,"
Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Google started with the motto 'Do No Evil', and while their application of this policy may be in question by some, and while they are undoubtedly a monopoly when it comes to search (and getting close when it comes to online advertising) I have to say I'm happy they will not let the big dogs stick to their old tricks Google Wants Open Access Pledge from Verizon[^] "Verizon is not free to self-define the rule to exclude any and all Verizon devices," the filing reads. "The commission must ensure that Verizon understands that this license obligation means what it says: any apps, any devices." Excellent.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
I rather like the look of their public face[^]. Much more appealing than the public face of my company - me.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
I rather like the look of their public face[^]. Much more appealing than the public face of my company - me.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
"She acts as a gatekeeper for their product release process, determining when or whether a particular Google product is ready to be released to users" Man her job is easy! "So, Marissa - what's the status of Google <whatever>?" "Gee, I guess it's still in beta!"
-
"She acts as a gatekeeper for their product release process, determining when or whether a particular Google product is ready to be released to users" Man her job is easy! "So, Marissa - what's the status of Google <whatever>?" "Gee, I guess it's still in beta!"
martin_hughes wrote:
"She acts as a gatekeeper for their product release process, determining when or whether a particular Google product is ready to be released to users" Man her job is easy! "So, Marissa - what's the status of Google ?" "Gee, I guess it's still in beta!"
:laugh: Much respect for her qualifications and experience though.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Google has done a pretty good job of sticking to their core values. (dodging flames now, ow that one hurt a bit). Being "evil" seems to equate to being prosperous. It seems that ANY company that saturates the market becomes the target. Even here. We all make a living from Microsoft and their products/technology, but others beat them down. Why, when it's the hand that feeds you? If the internet consisted of just 3 areas, I would be content with: 1. Email 2. Google search 3. Microsoft .NET Oh and CodeProject of course. But I could find it with google. Nice rankings BTW :laugh:
Bert delaVega wrote:
If the internet consisted of just 3 areas, I would be content with: 1. Email 2. Google search 3. Microsoft .NET
Bit confused. What would you search if the net consisted of an email service and a Microsoft programming framework? You'd search your email and the MSDN docs?
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
I rather like the look of their public face[^]. Much more appealing than the public face of my company - me.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
My boss tried to pay me a compliment today. He said "You are like Marissa Mayer of Google..." What? I'm blonde and female? Eh? "No, no, she started in Google early on and is now a multi-millionaire!" Oh right. So I'm gonna be a multi-millionaire but I have to dye my hair and get a sex change? We wandered onto other topics at this point and pretended he'd never said it. Bosses can be... odd at times.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
"She acts as a gatekeeper for their product release process, determining when or whether a particular Google product is ready to be released to users" Man her job is easy! "So, Marissa - what's the status of Google <whatever>?" "Gee, I guess it's still in beta!"
LOL In fairness she does have a tough job. She's kept thousands of eager nerds like us from sticking stuff on Google.com.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
My boss tried to pay me a compliment today. He said "You are like Marissa Mayer of Google..." What? I'm blonde and female? Eh? "No, no, she started in Google early on and is now a multi-millionaire!" Oh right. So I'm gonna be a multi-millionaire but I have to dye my hair and get a sex change? We wandered onto other topics at this point and pretended he'd never said it. Bosses can be... odd at times.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
Paul Watson wrote:
So I'm gonna be a multi-millionaire but I have to dye my hair and get a sex change?
Seems fair - two reasons not to want to leave the house.
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
Google started with the motto 'Do No Evil', and while their application of this policy may be in question by some, and while they are undoubtedly a monopoly when it comes to search (and getting close when it comes to online advertising) I have to say I'm happy they will not let the big dogs stick to their old tricks Google Wants Open Access Pledge from Verizon[^] "Verizon is not free to self-define the rule to exclude any and all Verizon devices," the filing reads. "The commission must ensure that Verizon understands that this license obligation means what it says: any apps, any devices." Excellent.
cheers, Chris Maunder
CodeProject.com : C++ MVP
Who? Never heard of 'em.
-
My boss tried to pay me a compliment today. He said "You are like Marissa Mayer of Google..." What? I'm blonde and female? Eh? "No, no, she started in Google early on and is now a multi-millionaire!" Oh right. So I'm gonna be a multi-millionaire but I have to dye my hair and get a sex change? We wandered onto other topics at this point and pretended he'd never said it. Bosses can be... odd at times.
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
"So, Paul... how's that project coming along?" "In Beta." "Still?" "Yes." "Do you know, you're just like Marissa Mayer of Google..."
-
Who? Never heard of 'em.
PIEBALDconsult wrote:
Who? Never heard of 'em.
You must post questions in the forums then. ;P
Deja View - the feeling that you've seen this post before.
-
"So, Paul... how's that project coming along?" "In Beta." "Still?" "Yes." "Do you know, you're just like Marissa Mayer of Google..."
"Thanks boss. Could you pay me as well as she is paid then?"
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
-
"Thanks boss. Could you pay me as well as she is paid then?"
regards, Paul Watson Ireland & South Africa
Fernando A. Gomez F. wrote:
At least he achieved immortality for a few years.
"Sure. When you look as good as Marissa, or hell freezes over. Whichever comes first."
-
martin_hughes wrote:
What is it with Western Governments selling off stuff that should be in the hands of the people
There's a big difference between "the people" and "the government," even though the latter usually claims to be the former.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
They claim they represent the people. Additionally there is a difference between "the people" and "a private corporation", even though the latter claims even more ridiculous things.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighist -
They claim they represent the people. Additionally there is a difference between "the people" and "a private corporation", even though the latter claims even more ridiculous things.
We are a big screwed up dysfunctional psychotic happy family - some more screwed up, others more happy, but everybody's psychotic joint venture definition of CP
blog: TDD - the Aha! | Linkify!| FoldWithUs! | sighistpeterchen wrote:
They claim they represent the people.
Yes, they certainly do, don't they?
peterchen wrote:
Additionally there is a difference between "the people" and "a private corporation",
Or "a public corporation." 'Tis probably wise to remember that "the people" are not the same as a corporation or a government.
Jon Smith & Wesson: The original point and click interface
-
What is it with Western Governments selling off stuff that should be in the hands of the people? I mean surely telecoms companies should be bidding for a licence to broadcast on a particular frequency (or range of), not actually owning the damned things?
martin_hughes wrote:
What is it with Western Governments selling off stuff that should be in the hands of the people?
Short-term revenue raising. Classic example was Australia's Howard gov't of the 90's-early 2k's, selling off the majority the gov't owned, nation-wide telecommunications corporation Telstra. Before being corporatised, Telecom Australia was a world leader in many technology areas (e.g. fibre-optics, mobile communications) and after was a pure profit machine, generating in excess of AU$1B annually. Promoted as "A chance for all Australians to own a piece of Telstra" (never mind that all Australians already owned Telstra - through their representative body, the Federal Gov't - as opposed to only those who could afford the purchase-price of the minimum allotment), the Howard Gov't raised a bucket of cash & touted their budget surpluses for years as proof of their economic know-how (all the while public services going down-hill in a big way :mad:). No doubt now that the sale profits have dwindled away, the political party of the former Howard gov't, now in opposition, will point at the new gov't and say they're incompetent when they bring in budgets in deficit of (I'll bet) about AU$1B annually :mad:. Of course Howard looked good on paper to the casual observer but by the time the deficit hits the fan, he & his compadres will be (actually already are) long gone & it'll be someone else's mess to clean up :mad:.
T-Mac-Oz
-
See, the problem is that whatever people say, regardless of the advertising, regardless of the "fluff"....Google returns the best results....
C# has already designed away most of the tedium of C++.
RichardGrimmer wrote:
See, the problem is that whatever people say, regardless of the advertising, regardless of the "fluff"....Google returns the best results
And see, this is exactly why I will still fight in arguments against Microsoft, not as a mindless "DOWN WITH THE MAN!" argument, but because of this very issue. I'm not a big fan of monopolies, but I'll recognize if a monopoly has a good reason, like Google. Google is so big because frankly, they're the best. The opinion that they are the best is widely held, so when people think of searching, they mostly will go to Google because they either feel or have heard, that it will be the best tool for the job. Microsoft, however, is so big because a long time ago, they were the best, and because the higher-ups are (for the most part) very very business-savvy. That's my issue with them. They are a technology company, but really, the products they release are not their forte. They are a very good *business*. They managed to get in bed with enough manufacturers that basically, Average Joe can't get a computer without Windows, IE, Works/Office, whatever. They have taken the idea of an operating system and corrupted it. And because most non-tech-geek people are too lazy to fight back against that, they just go with the flow. Then, the software companies don't bother to port their software to any other operating system, so even those of us who would prefer something non-MS, if we want to do anything more than the absolute basics, we either have to write it ourselves or go digging for someone who wrote it and hope it does what we want. OK, OK, so I'm getting worked up, and I should calm down. But my overall point here is that if MS was tops because their products were the best, I wouldn't rail against them. But instead, they're tops because early on they hooked the masses and then deftly squashed any competition. And like a tick, they settled in for a nice long parasitical drink. All I can hope is that one day, enough people will get disgusted with them, their products (at least Vista helped there) and their business practices (their failed bid to buy out Yahoo!, thank God), that they'll FINALLY be willing to break out of the "Because it was already there, and I don't want to take the time to learn anything new" mentality and actually put some BRAINPOWER into their computer decisions, and MS will have to actually *gasp* INNOVATE something! Either that or tank trying. ::prepares to dodge flames:: <
-
RichardGrimmer wrote:
See, the problem is that whatever people say, regardless of the advertising, regardless of the "fluff"....Google returns the best results
And see, this is exactly why I will still fight in arguments against Microsoft, not as a mindless "DOWN WITH THE MAN!" argument, but because of this very issue. I'm not a big fan of monopolies, but I'll recognize if a monopoly has a good reason, like Google. Google is so big because frankly, they're the best. The opinion that they are the best is widely held, so when people think of searching, they mostly will go to Google because they either feel or have heard, that it will be the best tool for the job. Microsoft, however, is so big because a long time ago, they were the best, and because the higher-ups are (for the most part) very very business-savvy. That's my issue with them. They are a technology company, but really, the products they release are not their forte. They are a very good *business*. They managed to get in bed with enough manufacturers that basically, Average Joe can't get a computer without Windows, IE, Works/Office, whatever. They have taken the idea of an operating system and corrupted it. And because most non-tech-geek people are too lazy to fight back against that, they just go with the flow. Then, the software companies don't bother to port their software to any other operating system, so even those of us who would prefer something non-MS, if we want to do anything more than the absolute basics, we either have to write it ourselves or go digging for someone who wrote it and hope it does what we want. OK, OK, so I'm getting worked up, and I should calm down. But my overall point here is that if MS was tops because their products were the best, I wouldn't rail against them. But instead, they're tops because early on they hooked the masses and then deftly squashed any competition. And like a tick, they settled in for a nice long parasitical drink. All I can hope is that one day, enough people will get disgusted with them, their products (at least Vista helped there) and their business practices (their failed bid to buy out Yahoo!, thank God), that they'll FINALLY be willing to break out of the "Because it was already there, and I don't want to take the time to learn anything new" mentality and actually put some BRAINPOWER into their computer decisions, and MS will have to actually *gasp* INNOVATE something! Either that or tank trying. ::prepares to dodge flames:: <