Slashdot Mirror


Google Releases Web APIs

skunkeh writes "Google have released the first beta of their Web APIs package. Used in conjunction with a free license key this SOAP based web service allows developers to execute up to 1000 automated queries a day, but is currently available for non-commercial use only. The download comes with Java and .NET code examples and includes a WSDL description for use with other SOAP supporting languages." There's also a write up about uses on Userland.

144 comments

  1. Web API Implementations by skunkeh · · Score: 5, Informative
    A list of implementations of the Google Web API can be found on SoapWare:

    http://www.soapware.org/directory/4/services/googl eApi/implementations

    At the time of posting languages catered for were for AppleScript, Frontier/Radio, Perl, Python and Visual Basic. I've written a basic implementation in PHP which has yet to be added to the list - you can find it here:

    http://toys.incutio.com/php/php-google-web-api.htm l

    This is a very cool toy.

    1. Re:Web API Implementations by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sorry for hijacking this thread, but in the last story about "google" someone mentioned that there should be a google topic on slashdot, and someone offered up these icons. Why isn't there a google topic on slashdot?

  2. This story refers to by sydneyfong · · Score: 3, Informative
    --
    Don't quote me on this.
  3. AppleScript for Google API by Lysander+Luddite · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://radio.weblogs.com/0100012/stories/2002/04/1 1/applescriptForGoogleApi.html

    has some Applescript for your use

    1. Re:AppleScript for Google API by bodin · · Score: 4, Informative
    2. Re:AppleScript for Google API by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 1

      Is there a problem with the slashdot script? Spaces seem to appear in the middle of long unbroken lines. Is this an anti-lamer tactic or something?

    3. Re:AppleScript for Google API by ethereal · · Score: 1

      It prevents "page-widening" attacks, by breaking up any string that would display in such a way as to force the browser window to be too wide. You'll notice that the extra space is only inserted in the displayed text; the actual link itself is OK.

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    4. Re:AppleScript for Google API by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lot of good that does. It breaks more things than it fixes -- browse this thread at -1.

  4. w00t! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Now I can write programs to generate Google-whacks!

    1. Re:w00t! by igrek · · Score: 1, Offtopic
  5. A great corporate move by shankark · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Other than being a really cool idea, this is a great tactical move from Google. On the one hand, by restricting the number of queries made to Google, they ensure that their APIs aren't misused/compromised, it also gives companies an initiative to purchase Google products and deploy this API (probably an unrestricted-query API) on their own network. Furthermore, an API such as this will easily muscle out any sniff of a competition from other search engine wannabes. Google has managed to do all this and yet be as compliant
    to an Open Source initiative as possible. Remarkable.

    1. Re:A great corporate move by skunkeh · · Score: 5, Informative
      From the FAQ:
      2. Does Google have any plans to sell Google Web APIs as a service?

      Not at this time.

      Which seems very strange seeing as this could be a huge money spinner. Surely a license system which allows commercial users to subscribe to a certain number of queries a day, or just buy queries in bulk would generate a lot of income for Google and provide a valuable service to the internet business community at large.
    2. Re:A great corporate move by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ...not to mention that the 1,000 query limit/ day is only whetting an appetite. Any wagers on whether or not there will be a sweet little pricetag on 10,000 queries/ day or unlimited queries/ day? A pricetag corporate clients will gobble up? Remarkable indeed!

      --
      intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    3. Re:A great corporate move by gowen · · Score: 5, Insightful
      2. Does Google have any plans to sell Google Web APIs as a service?

      Not at this time.
      Sure, thats what they say, but what they mean is :

      "of course we do. You think we're doing this out of love? But we don't know what they are just yet, and we want to get things right. So go away, and we'll put out a press release as and when we're ready."

      Which is fair enough.
      --
      Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
    4. Re:A great corporate move by ergo98 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I wonder if Google is already providing some sort of paid service to large corporations. On my website on day I actually got a hit coming from a chap at the Redmond campus of Microsoft, and he was searching via http://www.google.com/microsoft : BTW, at the time I'm quite sure that that page actually displayed the Microsoft logo as well.

    5. Re:A great corporate move by arkanes · · Score: 2

      Google makes these really, really cool little search appliance things that you set up on your network. Slashdot has a story about it, and I'm sure you can find some stuff on the google site. They also provide site indexing services.

    6. Re:A great corporate move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They just want to get the bugs out first with non-paying customers. Then when it works as it should it will be unleased to the commercial world. At least that is how I see it.

    7. Re:A great corporate move by mini+me · · Score: 1

      Google has sections for various things.

      Such as
      Linux
      BSD
      Uncle Sam

      And I'm sure there are plenty of others...

    8. Re:A great corporate move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not strange at all. They'll wait until all the morons start using it and then charge for a new key. I'll stick to parsing the HTML. I'll be waiting for the follow-up story about the license change in a few months. Don't people EVER learn?

    9. Re:A great corporate move by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True, but such a move would probably also devalue the Google brand name (if everybody is offering Google search it becomes less valuable). Which may or may not be a concern for Google, but brand recognition is important from a business standpoint.

    10. Re:A great corporate move by jeffphil · · Score: 1

      And I'm sure there are plenty of others...

      Mac, of course.

      -----

    11. Re:A great corporate move by sparx · · Score: 1

      Boy, you've really shown them then, haven't you? All they've gotta do is change up their output a bit and you just as screwed. Conspiracy theories aside, getting data without having to worry about the -presentation- of that data is a good thing for everyone.

    12. Re:A great corporate move by syates21 · · Score: 1

      If you look here you can see a whole bunch of "special" Google URL that automatically limit searches to certain domains. Most of these are actually universities.

  6. And you thought Microsoft was spying? by Spackler · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    "To access the Google Web APIs service, you must create a Google Account and obtain a license key"

    Gee, and now Google will log every search from your automated application.

    1. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by Spackler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      DOH. And I hit submit before the good part:

      Your program must include your license key with each query you submit to the Google Web APIs service.

    2. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by flipflapflopflup · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      > now Google will log every search from your
      > automated application

      And why shouldn't they?

    3. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You are so right... this is a shocking way of doing buisness. These guys arn't even giving you root access to their servers... Shame on them.

      What I find even more amazing is that you seem to expect this unrestricted acces.

    4. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by fr2ty · · Score: 1

      Ha, you are being funny.

      Ever thought of forbidding people to remember letters they receive?

      Everyone can log http requests to hos or her machine, so do you.Microsoft spying on us is different: They sell programs to you that establish internet connections without your consent, or send additional data along with your requests.

      Can you see the difference?

    5. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by TechnoVooDooDaddy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      ummm... yeah... that's partly how they do their whole weighting thing to determine hot websites for search criteria.. without that in place, you'd have to search through tons of crap to find what you want.. I regularly use the "I feel lucky" button on google, because their algorithms manage to pull up what i'm looking for first hit..

    6. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by anthony_dipierro · · Score: 2

      Gee, and now Google will log every search from your automated application.

      And now you can create your own peer-to-peer google search which eliminates the logging altogether.

    7. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by ethereal · · Score: 1

      You're missing the point - it's not that they keep logs of searches (pretty much any web server anywhere is keeping similar logs) and use those searches to sort their database, it's that your searches are specifically traceable to you via your license key if you search through this API. So don't be searching for anything particularly private, unless of course you trust Google more than the average corporation.

      I don't see why the ancestor got modded down as "flamebait" - this is a good point. Apparently it's "flamebait" to say anything good about Microsoft (not that I've tried that one) or bad about Google around here :)

      --

      Your right to not believe: Americans United for Separation of Church and

    8. Re:And you thought Microsoft was spying? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a bad idea. The results could be cached across nodes and if no node has a result then it would be then passed onto Google.

  7. Google groups may require a Google account.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    "...The initial service available with your Google Account is:

    Google Web APIs - a tool for software developers to automatically query Google

    In the future, your Google account will provide access to all Google programs requiring sign in including: Google Groups, Google AdWords, Google Store, Google in Your Language program...."


    Does that mean that accessing the Google Groups is now going to need me to create an account? Hmm..

    1. Re:Google groups may require a Google account.. by skunkeh · · Score: 2

      No, it means posting on Google Groups through the web interface (which already requires an account) will be possible using your single Google account as opposed to a seperate one for Google Groups and the web API.

    2. Re:Google groups may require a Google account.. by AVee · · Score: 4, Informative

      Well this is what it told me:
      In the future, your Google account will enable login access to all Google services, including Google Groups posting, Google AdWords, the Google Store, the Google in Your Language program, and more.
      (My emphasis)

      Notice the difference?

  8. Example of use by dtr20 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I just had a go with this and some example output is displayed below. Basically you can do a search of their main web pages, request a cached page or use their spellchecker.

    Dave

    $ java -cp googleapi.jar com.google.soap.search.GoogleAPIDemo XXmykeyXX search "british empire"
    Parameters:
    Client key = XXmykeyXX
    Directive = search
    Args = british empire
    Google Search Results:
    ======================
    {
    TM = 0.117071
    Q = "british empire"
    CT = ""
    TT = ""
    CATs =
    {
    {SE="", FVN="Top/Regional/Europe/United_Kingdom/Society_an d_Culture/History"}
    }
    Start Index = 1
    End Index = 10
    Estimated Total Results Number = 688000
    Document Filtering = true
    Estimate Correct = false
    Rs =
    {

    [
    URL = "http://www.btinternet.com/~britishempire/empire/e mpire.htm"
    Title = "The British Empire"
    Snippet = "| Introduction | Articles | Biographies | Timelines
    | Discussio
    n | Map Room | Armed Forces | Art ... "
    Directory Category = {SE="", FVN=""}
    Directory Title = ""
    Summary = ""
    Cached Size = "5k"
    Related information present = true
    Host Name = ""
    ],
    ...

    1. Re:Example of use by imnoteddy · · Score: 1

      Nice. Tried your example using my brand new key and it works just fine. Now to figure out what to do with my new toy...

      --
      No electrons were harmed creating this post, though some may have been subjected to electrical and/or magnetic fields.
  9. Trying to /. google???? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Won't work, evil doers!!

  10. O'Reilly has some good code and stuff by bodin · · Score: 5, Informative

    O'Reilly has a good article here with some code as well in both Java and Perl.

    http://www.oreillynet.com/cs/weblog/view/wlg/1283

  11. Google Terms of Service by AVee · · Score: 4, Funny
    To create an Google account you have te agree with the Google Terms of Service. These state the following:

    No Automated Querying

    You may not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system without express permission in advance from Google. Note that "sending automated queries" includes, among other things:
    • using any software which sends queries to Google to determine how a website or webpage "ranks" on Google for various queries;
    • "meta-searching" Google; and
    • performing "offline" searches on Google.
    Now, how can I use the web API?!
    Note that this is not in the Google Api TOS wich you must agree to before downloading the api. But in the Google Terms of Service wich you must agree to before creating a Google account needed to use the Google Api.

    Still, it's fun and i'll play with it!
    1. Re:Google Terms of Service by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 5, Funny

      Considdering you get Googles express permission for it:

      Your Google Account and license key entitle you to 1,000 automated queries per day.

      I happen to have a pair of spare glasses lying around, (+2,75 on each eye) - wanna borrow them?

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  12. slashdotted, i think by Ermyf+Jym · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Here's a copy of the write up. My machine barely made it to the site :)
    Google is just the juice
    Thu, Apr 11, 2002; by Dave Winer.
    Good afternoon

    A very quick piece today, a story, a question, an answer and a pointer.

    The story -- 1995. A new release of Netscape. Can't get through to their servers. This thing is exploding. A mind bomb every minute. Wow. I love this. End of story.

    The question: Can it happen again?

    The answer..

    Yes!

    This afternoon Google opened a public SOAP 1.1 interface.

    Now, from scripts, we can call Google as if it were a script running locally.

    What comes back? Data.

    What questions should we ask?

    That's where the mind bombs will come from.

    In the loop

    We've been in the loop with Google, privately, for the last few weeks, so we've had a chance to play with ideas and actually have some.

    Yesterday, as a tease, I put a Google Box on Weblogs.Com. Every hour it recalcs, showing the top 10 hits on Google for the term weblog. To my surprise, it changes, it's not constant. And it took me to places I didn't know about. The serendipity of queries that run for a long time. That, imho, is where the juice is in the Google API; and probably many or most of the APIs that are sure to follow; because Google is so popular.

    Google hits the ball over the net, then we return the volley. Finally, once again, signs of life. Let's hope we learn from the past -- and keep the spark going -- welcoming competition and learning from it instead of snuffing it out. The intoxication of a new idea every day is too good to not want to be there once again.

    Maybe the dark ages are over? I hope so.

    Google is just the juice

    It's happening in real time. As I write this I'm waiting for the embargo to lift. As soon as that happens, we'll start releasing new parts and samples for Radio and Frontier users that connect to Google's SOAP interface, with simple but geekish instructions for getting started.

    Later today Google Boxes will start showing up on Radio weblogs, which you can follow through Weblogs.Com. You'll see SOAP developers, on all platforms, getting to work, creating and publishing the glue that turns the Internet, finally, into a fantastic scripting environment. Google is just the juice we need.

    Dave Winer

  13. Staggering Potential by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Whilst the potential of a regular Google search is large enough, when you consider the Google search modifiers, the potential becomes staggering. Imagine using the following features:

    • Business Address Lookup
    • File Type Specific Search (.PDF etc..) (filetype:)
    • Stock Quotes
    • Cached Links (/. Favourite) (cache:)
    • Similar Pages (related:)
    • Linked Sites (link:)
    • Site Specific (site:)
    • Maps

    Does anyone happen to know if you can use the other sections of Google (e.g. news, images etc.)?

    Is Google the best company ever or what?!

    1. Re:Staggering Potential by selderrr · · Score: 2, Funny

      Is Google the best company ever or what?!

      Nope. Microsoft is.

    2. Re:Staggering Potential by darkpurpleblob · · Score: 2, Informative

      Does anyone happen to know if you can use the other sections of Google (e.g. news, images etc.)?

      From the FAQ:

      Can Google APIs be used to access Google Groups? Image search? Directory search?

      No. The Google Web APIs service can only be used to search Google's main index of 2 billion Web pages.

      --

    3. Re:Staggering Potential by dimator · · Score: 2

      You're both wrong. It's these guys.

      --
      python -c "x='python -c %sx=%s; print x%%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))%s'; print x%(chr(34),repr(x),chr(34))"
  14. todays tasks are apparent by wishiwascool · · Score: 1

    Well,

    I know what I'll be doing when I get to work today. Just my additional 2 cents to this marvelous addition to Google.

  15. Pigeonrank anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    I wanna program some pigeons!

    1. Re:Pigeonrank anyone? by dynoman7 · · Score: 1

      public class Pigeon
      {
      public short weight;
      public String name;
      public void Pigeon(){...}
      public void feedPigeon{...}
      public gSearchResult searchPigeon{...}
      ...
      }

      --
      Blarf.
    2. Re:Pigeonrank anyone? by tb3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      So, I guess

      public void Pigeon()

      is what makes them crap on your shoulder?

      --

      www.lucernesys.comHorizon: Calendar-based personal finance

    3. Re:Pigeonrank anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      public bool SendTCPviaPigeon() { ... }

  16. Anyone care to explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    how this is different than using a script to parse Google's output?

    White Hat Research.net

    Geek Clothes - Including a shirt with the (in)famous Ben Franklin quote!

    1. Re:Anyone care to explain... by jmacgill · · Score: 1

      The old terms and conditions prohibited any automated 'page scraping' so I guess this a leagal and much cleaner way of processing google output.

      --
      Spell checker (c) creative spelling inc. (aka my dyslexic brain)
    2. Re:Anyone care to explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Less work manually parsing HTML, presumably...

    3. Re:Anyone care to explain... by Software · · Score: 5, Informative

      OK, your script parses Google's HTML output today, but what about a year from now when Google changes its output, to say, XHTML or plain text or something. How well will your script work then? Although the Google API could change tommorow like some companies' , in general APIs are more stable. I haven't looked at their API, but I'm guessing it's also easier to develop against their API, and it should be less processor- and network-intensive.

    4. Re:Anyone care to explain... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well....


      You have permission now. Perl's module with an http api (read downloading the pages and extracting data) was removed from CPAN at google's request.

  17. More Advanced Features? by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I think I speak for most when I ask if you can have your results back in the "interesting" language sets:

  18. Re:AppleScript for Google API? by zaren · · Score: 1

    I get the following when I load that URL:

    -----
    Not Found

    The requested URL /0100012/stories/2002/04/1 was not found on this server.
    -----

    Did you drop something out of that URL, or did it lose something when it got posted?

    Aww, FSCK!

    --
    Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
  19. why not just use plain http by sanermind · · Score: 3, Insightful

    If they are going to limit you to only 1000 queries, I fail to see the point. It wouldn't be hard at all to write a simple API on your own to, say, a c++ class that spits out the necessary url's [like http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=example]
    or the like, dispatch them to google port 80, and then parse the results into easily program readable data sets/results? A third party could write this sort of thing easily enough if there was demand for it. I mean, esentially the google search API isn't going to be offering anything not available in the standard forms, is it? Except their spell checker, I believe. [Which you could use via html too, actually, "Did you mean: ______" ]

    --

    ---
    the pen is mightier than the sword, the sword is mightier than the court, the court is mightier than the pen.
    1. Re:why not just use plain http by beebware · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Except if Google does notice a disproportional number of search from an IP address (even a netblock) they do reserve the right to block your IP/netblock. This way, at least, you are querying their database without breaching their TOS...

    2. Re:why not just use plain http by gorilla · · Score: 2

      And the API calls are reasonably guaranteed to be stable, while HTML parsing can break at any time if Google decides to change their output format.

    3. Re:why not just use plain http by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      If google changes the way their results are displayed then your simple API breaks, that's why.

  20. What about slashdot? by aozilla · · Score: 3, Interesting

    How long until slashdot offers this service?

    --
    ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  21. NNTP tunneling ? by Bert+Peers · · Score: 3, Insightful
    In case the engineers at google are bored now that it's released, here's an idea ;) Open up groups.google.com via a similar API so that an application can get the latest Usenet info even through proxies blocking NNTP and/or newsservers. Showing the latest threads/posts etc on a webpage could be useful too.


    It's not something you have to go to google for, but it'd be nice :)

    1. Re:NNTP tunneling ? by km790816 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is where things get interesting.

      Companies have become happy blocking ports to restrict no-nos: messaging, newsgroups, etc.

      I'm wondering how long it will be until we start seeing firewalls that can filter/block SOAP calls for the very reasons you mention. SOAP just forces network admins to move up from ports and protocals to sniffing HTTP requests to keep people from having too much fun.

      Enjoy it while it lasts.

    2. Re:NNTP tunneling ? by malakai · · Score: 1

      SOAP standard makes it easy to filter/block SOAP calls. But the key is, you can do it per-interface and per-method.
      SOAP clients send their data using M-POST, which mandates the server understand the Interface URI header, and the method-name header.
      This should allow network admins to restrict/allow specifically what they desire, and not force them to have to turn off SOAP through a firewall as a whole.

    3. Re:NNTP tunneling ? by khuber · · Score: 1

      There will always be a way around that kind of stuff (besides moving to a better company). Imagine encoding your request and sending it through a proxy decoder outside your firewall. Surf the web using email? Or get a wireless carrier? The persistent hackers will never be stopped, because they have more knowledge and interest than a network admin who's just working their 40.

      -Kevin

    4. Re:NNTP tunneling ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      poo.
      you block RPC ports. i use HTTP & SOAP.
      you filter HTTP. i use HTTPS & SOAP.
      your turn, punk.

    5. Re:NNTP tunneling ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      SOAP makes it extremely difficult to filter messages--intentionally so because they knew networks wouldn't default to letting everything through if admins had adequate control early on. To make filtering easy, you have to identify the service at a fixed offset in the first (if not every) packet--today's production routers don't have anywhere near the horsepower to waste assembling TCP payloads and parsing HTTP headers looking for a "SOAPAction" whose value is variable-length (and which the W3C made optional anyway!)

  22. only 10 results per search?? by ShaggusMacHaggis · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The 1000 searches a day is very nice....I know I would never need that many (if results were unlimited anyway).

    HOWEVER...you only get 10 results per search??

    1. Re:only 10 results per search?? by Mr+M · · Score: 1

      I thought this was strange at first until I realised this was based on their existing search.

      Perform a search on Google. By default you'll get a list of ten results. The "Next" link shows a parameter called "start" that on the first result is 10, the second 20, and so on. So you can get more than 10 results by using multiple queries. This means the maximum number of results per day is 10,000.

  23. They already do... by xtermz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ... sort of.. they have a XML file out there off of the main site that you can query to get the latest headlines...

    i've actually used it before with a simple VB app...

    email me if you want the code...

    --


    I lost my concept of community when my community lost all concept of me.
    1. Re:They already do... by aozilla · · Score: 2

      That's just the headlines... Pretty useless...

      --
      ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  24. Re:Why do ppl use such a shitty browser anyways? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It does. Haven't you read einstein?

  25. access to postings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I would love a computer-friendly way to access postings. The limited UI offered by a web browser is not the right way to read these huge, nested discussions! I've been playing with better interfaces, and have kludgey code for parsing slashdot HTML pages, but it would be wonderful to have something cleaner and less brittle.

    1. Re:access to postings by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Care to share that kludgy code with the rest of us?

  26. Question by loconet · · Score: 2, Funny

    Anyone else feels that if google ever dissapears, they will become very unproductive?

    --
    [alk]
  27. Re:Since when do we like Google? by aozilla · · Score: 1

    FYI:

    We like them Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.
    We love them Tuesday, Thursday, and Saturday.
    And we alternate Sundays.

    Get with the program.
    --
    ---

    --
    ok then your [sic] infringing on my copyright! Could you as [sic] me next time before STEALING my comments for your own?
  28. Re:AppleScript for Google API? by Lysander+Luddite · · Score: 2

    It must have most something when posted. Sonmebody posted the "correct" url in a reply, but it looks exactly the same as my post with the space between the 1s

    *shrug*

  29. Oh yes, porn. by iamr00t · · Score: 1

    And don't forget to fix the multipart merger.

  30. Synthesis by Asprin · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ummmmm. Ok, check this out.

    This morning on /. we have an article about Google releasing their SOAP 1.1 API followed immediately by an article from a guy that set up a spambot trap on his web site, and in the margin a poll about giving spammers what they deserve. Putting 2 and 2 and 2 together, I got 4, popped open a google box and started playing.

    All I did was ask google to search for "mailto" and "@msn.com" and lo and behold, she spit back 111,000 hits - hits that contain what look like legit email addresses IN THE THREE LINE SUMMARIES.

    The point is, now that google can be automated, what's to stop spammers from SOAPing their way into Google to do their harvesting? Would there be any point over what they're doing now? It might be cheaper, because you only have to run over the google results not the whole sites and since Google caches pages, you can even grab addresses from the past, somewhat.

    IT ALSO DEFEATS SPAMBOT TRAPS.

    Doesn't this give spammers whole new avenues to exploit?

    Worse, are webmasters going to have to put a halt to Google crawls?

    --
    "Lawyers are for sucks."
    - Doug McKenzie
    1. Re:Synthesis by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 2, Informative
      &ltsarcasm&gt
      LOL maybe we should just dismantle the whole internet, as clearly the internet is the channel used by spammers! Oh wait. The internet has many many positive uses. Gee!
      &lt/sarcasm&gt


      LOL a 4 for Interesting? Oh come on, this is ignorance, not information.


      Horrors! Spammers can use this!


      Uh 'scuse me but I can write a 10 line perl script that does the same thing. All I have to do is craft a query to google, and put a bunch of work into parsing out the real content from the HTML that comes back. Kind of a pain, but nothing a few regexp can't handle. This API is nothing new, it's just something handy. I'm seriously thinking I can replace a component of a research project here at our research facility with this. Why reinvent the wheel after all?


      Worse, are webmasters going to have to put a halt to Google crawls?


      It's called robots.txt. Ever run a web server? All this API does is let you do searches to google. Google is google is always searching. That's what robots.txt is for. You are not going to get crawled by this! This is not a BOT, just a QUERY TOOL.

    2. Re:Synthesis by Asprin · · Score: 1

      I hadn't considered that Google's already crawling you anyway (point taken - oops - someone mod me down!), but again, this defeats spambot traps. Further, some of the more useful tech-support-web-forum postings would be somewhat filtered out if webadmins restricted Google crawls by using robot.txt. (I think the bot trap article had some better policy-oriented ideas about how to accomplish this.)

      Regarding the PERL scripting, ten years ago, I actually joked with my friends about sending emails to people with batch/script/program attachments that deleted files with a message that sez "run this c00l program d00dez!" but it didn't occur to me that anyone would actually fall for it and that's what the human-engineering-virus "revolution" (Melissa, ILOVEYOU, et. al.) was all about.

      (I've also decided on rereading my comments and yours that I should have gone with my first instinct and posted this under the spambot traps article -- in retrospect, it would have been far more appropriate there. Oh, well I had a 50-50 shot and lost - thanks for keeping me honest!)

      --
      "Lawyers are for sucks."
      - Doug McKenzie
    3. Re:Synthesis by Tony-A · · Score: 2

      ...ten years ago, I actually joked with my friends about sending emails to people with batch/script/program attachments that deleted files with a message that sez "run this c00l program d00dez!" but it didn't occur to me that anyone would actually fall for it and that's what the human-engineering-virus "revolution" (Melissa, ILOVEYOU, et. al.) was all about.
      That's the problem with systems/applications that think they are smarter than the user and hide things from the user. Not showing file extensions, even the DOS batch file @ECHO OFF is a bad idea.

    4. Re:Synthesis by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The way to fight spammers is to complain to their (upstream) ISPs or customers, not to pretend your own email address doesn't exist. Spammers can grep for any string that starts with "mailto:". They don't really care how many invalid addresses they spam (because they're stealing others' bandwidth to do it) and they're hardly going to use the SOAP interface to obey Google's terms when they cheerfully violate their own ISP's terms!

      (My account and my web pages have my email address. I'm anonymous here because good ideas don't need names.)

    5. Re:Synthesis by sparkz · · Score: 2

      The DOS @echo off command is no different from the bourne [again] shell >dev/null 2>&1 ... is that bad, too?

      --
      Author, Shell Scripting : Expert Re
  31. Re:Web API Implementations - Ruby missing by pong · · Score: 2, Informative

    I just submitted a request to have Ruby/Google added to the list of implementations. Until then you can find it at http://www.caliban.org/ruby/

  32. Example from Python by f3e2 · · Score: 1

    PyGoogle allows you to access the web API from Python. Download here. Python has no SOAP support in the standard library, but a working SOAP library is included with PyGoogle.

    -Mark

    Dive Into Python - a free Python book for experienced programmers

    1. Re:Example from Python by haluness · · Score: 1

      Hi,
      tried using the code. The page mentions that I need SOAP.py 0.9.7.1, but the included version is 0.9.7

      On trying a google search SOAP.py gives me a traceback

      Any suggestions?

  33. Google Stock Exchange by tringstad · · Score: 2

    It seems there is still time to enter the Google Programming Contest and although I have neither the time nor the skill to do it, I do have an interesting idea if someone else wants to take a shot at it.

    Years ago, The Hollywood Stock Exchange was a somewhat popular game (maybe it still is, but it doesn't really interest me). The general idea being that you could "Buy shares of your favorite actors, movies, and music artists and watch their values rise or fall based on the success of their careers and personal life."

    It would be interesting to see a similar game based on the popularity of queries. It's clear from the Google Zeitgeist that certain search terms do gain and lose popularity on a regular basis, and for someone tapped in to mainstream culture, it may not be too hard to predict.

    I suppose you could do the same thing with the other info there (Browsers, OSs, Current Events, etc.) but I don't think it would be as interesting. Although... Anime searches might be neat.

    Anyhow, just an idea I'd love to see someone run with.

    -Tommy

    --
    "I got a half gallon of Jack, and 2 dozen Ant Traps. I'm about to get wild." -me
  34. Grammar nits by jdavidb · · Score: 1

    Google is singular. Even though the term represents an organization of many people, it is just one organization, and so the word is singular. You don't say, "The class have learned the material from lesson 5"; you say, "The class has learned the material from lesson 5."

    Trust me on this one. It's not like the word "data" where we monkeyed around and changed the semantics.

    So it's not, "Google Release Web APIs," it's "Google Releases Web APIs"; and it's not "Google have released ... ," it's "Google has released ... ." I know, it doesn't matter. That doesn't keep it from bothering me.

    1. Re:Grammar nits by GTRacer · · Score: 2
      Except maybe in Europe. And some other places, too. I know when I was in London I noticed that collective nouns were treated as plural: IBM have released... and so on.

      Same's true if you watch enough Britcoms or other British imports (damn do they make good crime dramas!).

      My 2 cents...

      GTRacer
      - Should be returning to England in a year or so...

      --
      Defending IP by destroying access to it? That makes sense, RIAA/MPAA. Go to the corner until you can play nice!
    2. Re:Grammar nits by ianmacd · · Score: 2, Informative

      True. Plural usage of a company name is correct in British English.

      --
      Ian Macdonald, Linux sysadmin & Ruby hacker
    3. Re:Grammar nits by jdavidb · · Score: 2

      Didn't know that. Cool. I stand corrected.

  35. Interactive Suck-Rules-O-Meter Now? by GeekLife.com · · Score: 2

    Maybe now Kuro5hin can redo their Interactive Sucks-Rules-O-Meter.

  36. Umm ok. by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

    LOL maybe we should just dismantle the whole internet, as clearly the internet is the channel used by spammers! Oh wait. The internet has many many positive uses. Gee!
    </sarcasm>
    LOL a 4 for Interesting? Oh come on, this is ignorance, not information.


    Horrors! Spammers can use this!


    Uh 'scuse me but I can write a 10 line perl script that does the same thing. All I have to do is craft a query to google, and put a bunch of work into parsing out the real content from the HTML that comes back. Kind of a pain, but nothing a few regexp can't handle. This API is nothing new, it's just something handy. I'm seriously thinking I can replace a component of a research project here at our research facility with this. Why reinvent the wheel after all?


    Worse, are webmasters going to have to put a halt to Google crawls?
    Huh? What does this API have to do with being crawled by google? All this API does is let you do searches to google. Google is google is always searching. That's what robots.txt is for. You are not going to get crawled by this! This is not a BOT, just a QUERY TOOL.

    1. Re:Umm ok. by Pvt_Waldo · · Score: 1

      Preview you fool! Slapslapslapslapslap....

  37. they own spell check results? by Dr.+Awktagon · · Score: 2

    The Google Rights include rights to the following:......(3) the search results and spell checking you obtain when you use Google Web APIs.

    I never thought I'd read the words "Google Rights" in a legal document, but anyway, how can Google own the rights to "spell checking".. what exactly do they own? The words that come back? The association of misspelled words to spelled words? How could you abuse that??

    I must say this is incredibly cool though.. however I would much rather see a generic "Search Engine API" that isn't owned by Google, and can be implemented by anyone.

    1. Re:they own spell check results? by yasth · · Score: 1

      I must say this is incredibly cool though.. however I would much rather see a generic "Search Engine API" that isn't owned by Google, and can be implemented by anyone.

      It could well become a defacto standard, as they are the first major search engine to do this, and other search engines will want to at the minimum provide a tool for migrating from Google powered applications to thier own, which of course means that one should be able to write to the google API and then use thier tools to port it to whatever one wants.

      --
      I'd do something interesting, but my server can't handle a slashdotting.
  38. Remeber, Ruby was there first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Recall that the first indication of this API's existence
    was from comp.lang.ruby. I suspect that the
    first implementation was in Ruby as well.
    You can find the Ruby version at:
    http://www.caliban.org/ruby/

    1. Re:Remeber, Ruby was there first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually considering the guy was asking for help, I really doubt Ruby was there first

  39. Notice how Google avoided use of CORBA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Notice how Google avoided use of CORBA for these APIs. That speaks volumes in favour of SOAP's robustness over CORBA knowing how these Google dudes are perfectionists.

    1. Re:Notice how Google avoided use of CORBA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The folks behind Google had one great idea (the most valuable pages are often linked to, and those are the ones search users probably want) and threw a ton of resources at it. That doesn't guarantee by any means that they're brilliant software engineers, and there's no reason to assume they evaluated CORBA and rejected it for any sound interoperability reasons rather than just chasing the herd of knuckle-dragging Microsoft victims.

  40. Not needed by NineNine · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Why is this needed? I've been using Google programatically for a while now. What does this offer that I can't use on my own?

    1. Re:Not needed by skunkeh · · Score: 3, Informative
      Legality for one thing:
      No Automated Querying

      You may not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system without express permission in advance from Google. Note that "sending automated queries" includes, among other things:

      • using any software which sends queries to Google to determine how a website or webpage "ranks" on Google for various queries;
      • "meta-searching" Google; and
      • performing "offline" searches on Google.
      It also stops your scripts from breaking every time Google redesign their results page.
    2. Re:Not needed by rbeattie · · Score: 1


      I was going to moderate you down, but decided to just respond to you bluntly instead.

      You're a fucking idiot.

      -Russ

      --
      Me
    3. Re:Not needed by Vulture_ · · Score: 1
      That's really pretty unenforceable. How is Google supposed to know if a query is automated? How is a query defined to be "automated"?

      For the latter, we have the following scenarios which could be interpreted as being automated:

      • You are using a computer to query Google. You're not actually twiddling the electrons in Google's servers with your fingers to perform the search.
      • If your browser has a built-in "Web Search" or "Google Search" function, the browser is automatically sending the query to Google and parsing the results before displaying them to you. You might also be using some standalone program that does this.
      • Some IRC bots (particularly infobot) have a Google search function, wherein someone (on a channel or in private) asks the bot to do a Google search. The bot does the search and displays the results to the user.
      • A user instructs their computer to do a Google search and save the results when a (dialup) Internet connection is established. Thus, a delayed search is performed. (This could be very useful for those who have to pay per minute for phone time to connect, and get lower rates during evenings or such. The connection would be established at a time when rates are low, the search performed, and the connection broken.)
      --

      The only way the typical /.er can pick up a chick is with a forklift. -- AC

    4. Re:Not needed by tshak · · Score: 1

      There's a difference between a "hack" and a solid implementation.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    5. Re:Not needed by NineNine · · Score: 2

      It's not a hack. It's simply programatically browsing, reading the results, etc. It's very fucking simple in VB, PERL, whatever.

    6. Re:Not needed by WWWWolf · · Score: 1

      HTML is great to make pages readable for users.

      SOAP is great to get stuff from web in format programs understand.

      Yes, it's possible to use HTML parsing and stuff for any site (I'm using such tools in Everything2.com), but they all need atrocitious amount of HTML parsing. Thank God for visual-regexp. =)

      However, if E2 would use SOAP, I'd just ask them "Give me IDs of writeups matching title "don't force your gray philosophy on me" and it gives them, and I have them in an @array. Period.

      (Praying the security bug in SOAP::Lite will be fixed and Nate will make good use of mod_soap =)

  41. Software? by swelling · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    So Google is deploying a SOAP interface to a very large scale system. Anybody know what kind of software they have supporting this? Is it a custom engine? SOAP4J? Heaven forbid, not ASP.NET!

  42. Is it possible to slashdot google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To apply slashdot effect to Google?

  43. Unlimited by phyxeld · · Score: 1

    So, you can execute 1,000 searches a day through their API, OR you can code your program to do a normal google search and parse the results out of the returned html (like people have had to do until now)...

    How many projects can't afford the overhead of a little html parsing but CAN afford to be limited to 1,000 searches/day? I'm sure they'll offer higher limits for a fee, but I think the DIY-html-parsing google "api" is going to keep on working just fine (and for free).

    --
    __
    Choose mnemonic identifiers. If you can't remember what mnemonic means, you've got a problem. - Larry Wall
  44. Looking for something similar to this by homestead · · Score: 1

    Does anyone know of any consumer retail sites that have a similar api to their online catalogs?

    I am a grad student looking to avoid html scrapping for one of my projects.

    Thanks

  45. TCL Implementation by azaroth42 · · Score: 1
    As there isn't one in the above list, I put together a TCL implementation at:

    http://gondolin.hist.liv.ac.uk/~cheshire/tclgoogle . tml

    Enjoy!

    -- Azaroth

  46. Re: Re:Since when do we like Google? by Accipiter · · Score: 2

    Sorry, I don't remember hating Google.

    --

    -- Give him Head? Be a Beacon?
    (If you can't figure out how to E-Mail me, Don't. :P)

  47. Re: Re:Since when do we like Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tyler Durden. Tyler Durden.

  48. In fact, farther down in the FAQ. by mbauser2 · · Score: 1
    Question 15 of the Technical FAQ is:

    15. What if I want to pay Google for the ability to issue more than 1,000 queries per day?

    Google is only offering the free beta service at this time. If you would like to see Google develop a commercial service, let us know at api-support@google.com.



    So, yeah, they're definitely interested in it if the developer community is interested in it.

    --
    Proud to be / Smiley-free / Since Nineteen / Ninety-Three
  49. 1000 queries per day? Dumb. by Vulture_ · · Score: 1
    So, Google limits automated queries, but allows unlimited interactive queries, even though the automated queries consume vastly less bandwidth and CPU than the interactive queries? Does this seem just a tad stupid to anyone else?

    Also, the limit on results per query severely limits the usefulness of this API.

    Finally, the requirement for a license key sounds a little Microsoftish to me. Since Google is not Microsoft, this is unlikely to work in their favor.

    For these reasons, I suspect that the release of this API may hurt Google more than it helps them.

    --

    The only way the typical /.er can pick up a chick is with a forklift. -- AC

    1. Re:1000 queries per day? Dumb. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't you being a bit melodramatic? How could it hurt them? If you don't like it, don't use it and you're no worse off than before.

  50. Userland and Airheads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does reading Userland make you want to vomit?

  51. But no searching images or newsgroups... by casio282 · · Score: 1
    Sadly, though, there is no support in the API for queries on their image or usenet "groups" indices, according to the API FAQ:
    2. Can Google APIs be used to access Google Groups? Image search? Directory search?

    No. The Google Web APIs service can only be used to search Google's main index of 2 billion web pages.

    I'll have to keep on parsin'...

    Maybe some day.

    --

    :wq
  52. Advertising by wackybrit · · Score: 1

    Google would rather you use their bandwidth and download their textads, than have a computer suck out the results with no branding. Easy.

  53. Re:New Web API Implementation - GoogleMail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Simple but interesting use for Google API - GoogleMail

    email google@capeclear.com with your query text as the 'Subject:'

    Useful for:
    - wireless devices
    - access google from Outlook / elm
    - remind yourself to do something on the Internet

    Try it google@capeclear.com

    Ed