I was reading this article in Wired, and saw a quote you might enjoy

At the petabyte scale, information is not a matter of simple three- and four-dimensional taxonomy and order but of dimensionally agnostic statistics. It calls for an entirely different approach, one that requires us to lose the tether of data as something that can be visualized in its totality. It forces us to view data mathematically first and establish a context for it later. For instance, Google conquered the advertising world with nothing more than applied mathematics. It didn't pretend to know anything about the culture and conventions of advertising — it just assumed that better data, with better analytical tools, would win the day. And Google was right.

This isn't what makes Google stand out from Yahoo - it's what makes Google different from Sears, Ford, and all who came before them. More specifically, it says

Google's founding philosophy is that we don't know why this page is better than that one: If the statistics of incoming links say it is, that's good enough. No semantic or causal analysis is required. That's why Google can translate languages without actually "knowing" them (given equal corpus data, Google can translate Klingon into Farsi as easily as it can translate French into German). And why it can match ads to content without any knowledge or assumptions about the ads or the content.

Now, I'm sure a few people here would beg to differ, and many more would say "well, yeah, they can do all that - they just can't do it that well". But that isn't so much the point, how great or awful Google is -

This is a world where massive amounts of data and applied mathematics replace every other tool that might be brought to bear. Out with every theory of human behavior, from linguistics to sociology. Forget taxonomy, ontology, and psychology. Who knows why people do what they do? The point is they do it, and we can track and measure it with unprecedented fidelity. With enough data, the numbers speak for themselves.

Maybe Google's algo is the cat's behind, but it doesn't have enough data. Maybe it's wrong, and they can't take advantage of all their data. Or, maybe, the whole entire idea is bunk. On the other hand, the general public, at least, seems fairly impressed with Google, so, maybe the idea has some validity after all.

Finally

But besides that, he has no better model of this species than Google has of your MySpace page. It's just data. By analyzing it with Google-quality computing resources, though, Venter has advanced biology more than anyone else of his generation.

Hey great article. One thing I have been paying attention to lately is how IE users react to the new Google Chrome Browser. To me that's one way of showing Google's "trust ability" to the general public.

nice article expecting same again from u

I have heard or read some reactions for the Google Chrome. There are some who likes it and some have some suggestions for it. But Google will still update and enhance their new browser for sure

Interesting article, I personally like Chrome and will like it more when it's not a beta anymore.

Very interesting... now I'm thinking too deep for this late on a friday, but a great read!

unable to install chrome.........

Your artical is very useful for Seo point of view it's also useful for those persons who are intrested in google and it's algo.

nice article thanks man

spirits

It's very useful to all the Google fans. I expect you will send more information about Google and other search engines

the articles has a lot of points to considered......really informative and useful post!

i'd like chrome of I could use it on a mac...

Thanks! Thats a good article.

get over it!
google is not that great.

you obviously speak as a layman.

i am a programmer. i can build models of google.
i know how it works.

frankly i have a better search model than google's

and frankly google is now way toooooo overrated.

overrated = bad. no matter what it is. overrate chocolate, you'll get fat. overrate dieting, you'll get anorexia or bulemia. moderation is the right approach to life.


google is arrogant
google is lacking all perspective now (it was not, when it began)
google is suffering from the usual demise that comes with great wealth


you want specifics?

easy. google shows you results which are arbitrarily chosen as "the most relevant" - there is no real way to 'police' their choices. we can't actually prove or know what they didn't find or show us. and moreover


if you search on google (go on, everyone open a second window)
for whatever you want, and get told "there are 7 gazillion results for lardball..." and you search all the pages google shows you you will find that by the time you get to the end of ALL results they have for you, you have in fact been shown only 1,000 results out of the 7 gazillion; moreover, large mainstream branded commercialism happens to usurp about 40% of those results.

google is NOT even remotely any good. like everything produced my modern post-industrial society, it's just another thinly disguised pile of carp, and i don't mean the fish, i'm just dodging the asterisks.

have you ever built your own search engine?

imagine if you wanted to - how would you do the search? what structure would you give your querying method? how would you take tonnnnes of data and find a good way to get matches inside it?

google did well. they found a good solution to that problem back in the late 90s. however, as Bill Gates has hinted Google has failed to do anything new of the same ilk. They are now just surviving on their reputation, their actual scientific value is not that great - they are a solution of yesteryear. many a dweeb can create their own pocket google at home if they want (it's not just me). what google has failed to do is impress developers and hold on to the reputation which gave them their power. as a result you can be sure that they won't exist any more in 10 years, or rather, they will, but they'll be second-rate, by their own present standards, in terms of the traffic. they will play yahoo to the next big internet powerhouse.

your quote, your post, your attitude is more evidence that this is where google is going

i am a veteran programmer who watched google become big, and who gave the credit when it was due. google have done nothing for me since 2000. it won't be hard for someone with the right talent to produce the next big phenomenon to take the world by storm. google have no chance in hell.

people simply lack an alternative. the true gurus in the early days of the e-commerce surge, specifically consultants at A.T.Kearney, informed me that the biggest reason why pre-internet businesses "retained" clients was due to apathy and a lack of any real way to find the many available alternatives. the brick and mortars called it loyalty, but found out from amazon, ebay, the affiliate networks and even google adwords, the truth about their absurd definition of loyalty.

google has now fallen into the same trap. since google's conception the size of the internet population i believe may have risen by a number in the region of three or four hundred million people - these people all started using the internet when it just happened that using google to search was the standard, the norm, the default. google gained their 'usership' by happenstance. these people are not hardcore lovers of google reared for half a decade on yellow and blue and nice googlist massive vibes. no indeed, these are largely just lay people who truly imagine that microsoft was invented before computers were, since their computers come as microsoft, by default!

it is blind to not see the fall of google. and ironically, the world IS blind. even i have trouble seeing it coming. but i know it is coming. in fact i'm planning to build the alternative myself. if you want a job, in future, PM me.

Originally Posted by John_audson

Your artical is very useful for Seo point of view it's also useful for those persons who are intrested in google and it's algo.

How?

Originally Posted by witnesstheday

get over it!
google is not that great.

you obviously speak as a layman.

i am a programmer. i can build models of google.
i know how it works.

I've made my living as a data centric computer programmer for 19 years now. The truth is you don't have enough information to build an accurate model of Google. Nobody outside the 'Plex knows their algorithm. Your model is made out of guess work. That's fine, so long as you recognize that it isn't accurate and does not reflect reality.

frankly i have a better search model than google's

and frankly google is now way toooooo overrated.

overrated = bad. no matter what it is. overrate chocolate, you'll get fat. overrate dieting, you'll get anorexia or bulemia. moderation is the right approach to life.


google is arrogant
google is lacking all perspective now (it was not, when it began)
google is suffering from the usual demise that comes with great wealth


you want specifics?

easy. google shows you results which are arbitrarily chosen as "the most relevant" - there is no real way to 'police' their choices. we can't actually prove or know what they didn't find or show us. and moreover


if you search on google (go on, everyone open a second window)
for whatever you want, and get told "there are 7 gazillion results for lardball..." and you search all the pages google shows you you will find that by the time you get to the end of ALL results they have for you, you have in fact been shown only 1,000 results out of the 7 gazillion; moreover, large mainstream branded commercialism happens to usurp about 40% of those results.

google is NOT even remotely any good. like everything produced my modern post-industrial society, it's just another thinly disguised pile of carp, and i don't mean the fish, i'm just dodging the asterisks.

have you ever built your own search engine?

imagine if you wanted to - how would you do the search? what structure would you give your querying method? how would you take tonnnnes of data and find a good way to get matches inside it?

google did well. they found a good solution to that problem back in the late 90s. however, as Bill Gates has hinted Google has failed to do anything new of the same ilk. They are now just surviving on their reputation, their actual scientific value is not that great - they are a solution of yesteryear. many a dweeb can create their own pocket google at home if they want (it's not just me). what google has failed to do is impress developers and hold on to the reputation which gave them their power. as a result you can be sure that they won't exist any more in 10 years, or rather, they will, but they'll be second-rate, by their own present standards, in terms of the traffic. they will play yahoo to the next big internet powerhouse.

your quote, your post, your attitude is more evidence that this is where google is going

i am a veteran programmer who watched google become big, and who gave the credit when it was due. google have done nothing for me since 2000. it won't be hard for someone with the right talent to produce the next big phenomenon to take the world by storm. google have no chance in hell.

people simply lack an alternative. the true gurus in the early days of the e-commerce surge, specifically consultants at A.T.Kearney, informed me that the biggest reason why pre-internet businesses "retained" clients was due to apathy and a lack of any real way to find the many available alternatives. the brick and mortars called it loyalty, but found out from amazon, ebay, the affiliate networks and even google adwords, the truth about their absurd definition of loyalty.

google has now fallen into the same trap. since google's conception the size of the internet population i believe may have risen by a number in the region of three or four hundred million people - these people all started using the internet when it just happened that using google to search was the standard, the norm, the default. google gained their 'usership' by happenstance. these people are not hardcore lovers of google reared for half a decade on yellow and blue and nice googlist massive vibes. no indeed, these are largely just lay people who truly imagine that microsoft was invented before computers were, since their computers come as microsoft, by default!

it is blind to not see the fall of google. and ironically, the world IS blind. even i have trouble seeing it coming. but i know it is coming. in fact i'm planning to build the alternative myself. if you want a job, in future, PM me.[/quote]

Interesting post Learning Newbie--I tend to agree with you on many points there--especially that they are surviving on their reputation they established years ago as the leader.