Slashdot Mirror
Google Tracking Frequent Users
BrianGa writes "According to this article, Google has started placing
a counter on its home page for a small number of its most frequent users.
Most Google users do not have it, but a select few now have a counter that notes
the actual number of searches made. For the curious, an explanatory page
linked to the counter reveals that this is a test, or limited-sample experiment
of a new search counting feature."
isn't this the google.com which logs every single IP + search since it first started?
My ISP (internet express in regional NSW, australia) receently entered into a contract with MSN to supply search services and with altavista and google search pages only the MSN one comes up instead
/etc/hosts but who wants to do that all the time?
I do get to google through a numeric address set in
We really get ripped off out here there are no big ISP options in country australia
Does frequent include searches using sourceid=mozilla-search?
Anyway, someone please capture/mirror the counter for us to check it out, before we ./ google to get our own (or rather, spend our bandwidth trying).
actually, I wouldn't have a choice. Who else has 20 years archives of usenet, which is the best source for solving technical problems?
Google is one of the few online tools I would consider paying for. If the paid-for version didn't include any ads/sponsored-placements at all, I'd probably do it.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
I wonder if any of the search engines have actually begun to use search patterns as an insight into consumer demands and profit off of such foresight.
It wouldn't be hard at all for a search engine to identify particularly insightful individuals, ones who consistently search for things in advance of their general availability or in advance of the masses, and use them as a barometer of future consumer demand.
That person could, of course, never know that they were being monitored in such a way. Imagine the possibilities of subverting such a system: make frequent searches for whatever you want and *poof* it appears a few months later.
"I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
"'It's one of our experiments,' Marissa Mayer, Google's director for consumer products, said. 'We're playing with it to understand what the effects of it would be.'"
So in other words:
1. Add unique user counters
2. ???
3. Profit!
I can see the the marketing section of Google jumping all over this. If they managed to uniquely identify users, they could very well "offer" the most frequent users a subscription based Google, in the terms of "you've been leeching off our free service for so long, how about giving some of that back?" Just assuming, of course.
That's just one of many new possibilities such a user-attributed counter could bring along the road.
parasight.de
Seems like most of the reactions here so far are, it is OK, because it is Google. The geeks choice for a search engine. I like Google, I use Google, and I have no problem with what they are doing, but I just wonder what the reaction would be if it were Microsoft that was doing this (they probably are anyway).
It says Chinese (Traditional) in traditional chinese.
Don't mind me, I'm just carping the diem...
I didn't think I was that special...
"You've done 94 searches - What's this?"
Although it's only on my home computer and not on any at work.
There are only 10 kinds of people in this world... those who understand binary and those who don't
I agree that google is one of the better online tools available on the net for free.
But personally, I'd only consider paying for it if it provided some value-added services i.e. customised/saved searches with say alerts for new finds (for example).
I wouldn't pay to have the ads/sponsored-placements removed since they aren't that intrusive to begin with (and even if they do become intrusive e.g. pop-ups etc, there's always privoxy).
--- root@127.0.0.1
> If you do believe that cookies are a bad thing(tm), then you
> should turn them off - and you might be better off burning your PC
> and move far, far awy from anyone who can even look at you as well.
Practically speaking, too many things break if you turn cookies off,
and asking the user about each one turns the web into a dialog box
festival. But you can limit the max cookie lifetime without
degrading your internet experience at all. Most browsers support
that option these days.
Cut that out, or I will ship you to Norilsk in a box.
I've forgotten the name of the story, but I recall one by Philip K. Dick or Arthur C. Clarke about opinion polls becoming more accurate by narrowing down the process to identifying "the truly average voter." Instead of bothering with the election, this single individual went into the polling place, and basically picked the next president, all by him/her-self.
This is a variation on the same theme, where we spot the trend-setter, or the person whose interests/tastes best reflect what will soon be percieved as those of "Joe Average." It may or may not be the most insightful person. It may just be the "most average," but who happens to stumble upon the "next big thing" first.
Tim
Trojan.Qhosts affects Windows users ... but I have a similar problem affecting a Mac user (system 9.x) whose attempts to reach google.com are being rerouted in the same way. Any ideas what might be causing this?
---
Problems that go away by themselves
also reappear by themselves
---
I find it quite more likely that they would store an ID number in the cookie and store the actual tracking information on their side than store all the data in a cookie. Besides, it makes more sense for them to keep information which is potentially useful for them safe on their side rather than wild in your cookie file.
Whoa! I stand corrected. I have a natural tendency to root for the underdog and had run across a Slashdot posting about Google Watch months ago. I visited Google Watch, did not investigate further, only changed my search habits a little (using Yahoo only to realize it IS Google) and left this in the ditch. Based on your post, I have visited some related sites. I find the pro-Google arguments and its place in the market far more understandable now than I did before getting into this hornet's nest. You may not have a made a true believer of me, but I have taken the large grain of salt regarding Google Watch. Perhaps it is only natural to be wary of anthing that gets as hugely successful as Google, especially when that success comes quickly. Point, set, match to M. hkmwbz.
In principio erat Verbum.