Archive for google

The Internet’s Landlord

Posted in miscellaneous, opinion, Photo with tags , , , , , , , , on 2012 October 25 by KLP

Data centers – Google Data centers

I noticed a link at the bottom of the Google Search page for a photo album of Google’s data centers. Not only do I appreciate the technology, logistics, and organization that the photos depict, but the photos themselves are really pretty, too.

However, the album’s title, Where the Internet Lives, concerns  me somewhat. Do we really want Google, or any large corporation, to be the Internet’s landlord? Perhaps we should strive for a more democratic, distributed, and decentralized Internet, where every household or community maintains its own servers and hosts its own members’ content.

If the Internet must have a landlord, what are the terms of the lease, and who pays the rent?

I love the future!

Posted in miscellaneous with tags , , , , , , on 2008 September 2 by KLP

 

Guilty.

"Guilty."

Today I deposited some checks at a Bank of America ATM. The machine instructed me not to use an envelope. All I had to do was feed it the endorsed checks one at a time. Then, it read the value of the checks without me having to type anything in. Maybe these new ATMs aren’t new to anyone except for me, but seriously: holy crap.

Also, I’m trying out Chrome. Not too shabby.

Will Google Eat Itself?

Posted in miscellaneous with tags , , , , , , on 2008 August 13 by KLP
Scamming Google... but not really.

Scamming Google... but not really.

My understanding of the Google Will Eat Itself (GWEI) art project and AdSense might be limited, but right now my astonishment isn’t.  I learned about the project from the Make blog. Apparently, the folks behind the project make lots of fake clicks on websites they’ve set up with AdSense. The money Google pays for each click is then used to buy shares of Google stock. When GWEI owns a sufficient amount of shares, the shares are then divvied up amongst shareholders.

The significance of GWEI is the concept it presents–Google eating itself–and the associated shock value. My own response was an enlightened “but, of course!”. As far as Google actually eating itself, though, we are not even talking nibbles. According to the GWEI website, they own 819 Google shares. They estimate that it’ll be at least 200,000 years before Google eats itself. So, as far as mortals are concerned, Google will not eat itself.

Even though GWEI will not achieve its apparent objective I wonder how much it pays for webspace, internet, and equipment. According to their statistics, I wouldn’t be surprised if one could profit off of such a venture. So I have to ask, why didn’t GWEI just keep the whole matter quiet from the start and run off with the money? From what I’ve read on the GWEI website, they’re trying to make some point about Google being some sort of nontraditional monopoly, but they could still just write a book about it later instead of flaunting their scam right now.

As such, I’m inclined to believe that GWEI is fake. It’s just a clever prank of sorts designed to make people think.

Or maybe try for themselves…

Too easy?

Too easy?

The YouTube Debates Aren’t that Awesome

Posted in opinion with tags , , , , on 2007 December 26 by KLP

This post on the Official Google Blog makes me pretty upset with Google. All this talk about breaking down barriers and not one mention of including third party candidates in future YouTube debates. Let’s get something straight: Google isn’t improving the political process. They’re just reinforcing the status quo, and claiming otherwise. So much for “don’t be evil”You can make money without doing evil“. If Google really wants to improve the political process, then they need to turn the election into a real competition and actually make it interesting. Imagine a debate where the debaters are judged on what they say and not on how they answer (or not answer) questions or how they behave or other minutia. Such a debate would actually be useful to voters. A sure way to bring this about is to invite third party candidates to debate. Doing so will call into question the legitimacy and earnest of the candidates who currently aren’t working hard enough or making enough of a case to deserve the position they seek. I agree that YouTube is powerful, but Google needs to use it to affect the sort of change that the USA needs. Something is wrong when elections are won by very slim margins. Blaming the problem on the red-state/blue-state division of the country is incorrect. Rather, the presidential candidates we’ve seen in the last few elections have been too similar. Modifying the debate format to help voters discern the difference between candidates isn’t the way to go about solving that problem. Rather, YouTube should use it’s muscle to force candidates to adopt diverse positions and give voters a real choice.

One might argue that YouTube couldn’t hope to hold a debate with third party candidates because Democrat and Republican candidates would refuse to participate for fear of the sea change that I’ve described. I argue that YouTube is too powerful for any candidate to ignore simply because they want the exposure. Google has no excuse.

Google, don’t be evil. Make things right.

@dmytri

Venture Communist. Miscommunications Technologist. Telekommunisten Polemicist. ThoughtWorks Analyst.