Slashdot Mirror


Behind the Scenes At Google

An anonymous reader writes "University of Wahington TV Presents "behind the Scenes With Google." From the site: 'Search is one of the most important applications used on the internet and poses some of the most interesting challenges in computer science. Providing high-quality search requires understanding across a wide range of computer science disciplines. In this program, Jeff Dean of Google describes some of these challenges, discusses applications Google has developed, and highlights systems they've built, including GFS, a large-scale distributed file system, and MapReduce, a library for automatic parallelization and distribution of large-scale computation. He also shares some interesting observations derived from Google's web data.' "

196 comments

  1. Google's dirty secret revealed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Google is actually a giant super computer which has become self-aware. Every person it "hires" is actually one more person it saps knowledge from. In the not too distant future, it hopes to be able to network every human completely so that it can collect the remaining knowledge on Earth more easily.

    1. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by ardor · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes! It is skynet! Prepare for Armageddon, folks... And beware the T-800 with the strange austrian accent. Must be an error in the firmware.

      --
      This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    2. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by Seumas · · Score: 3, Funny

      Real men would have identified this as Colossus.

    3. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by geoff43230 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I think I saw this on "Star Trek" (and, also, "Futurama" - the "scooty-puff, junior" episode) one time. "Borgoogle : Resistance is results 1-10 of about 200."

    4. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by ElvenMonkey · · Score: 1

      I for one welcome our new supercomputer overlords.

      --
      "Joy is not in things; it is in us." Richard Wagner
    5. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by pcnetworx1 · · Score: 2
      "Ladies and Gentlemen, The Battle of the Titans" Google pingbombs Yahoo, Yahoo plants a supervirus in the Google cluster, and it goes haywire, the ol'trusty core router at Equinix falls in Ashburn causing a resonance cascade. Hubble falls from the sky in an uncontrolled descent, it hits a nuclear silo in Kansas, a missle launches; teh faulty russian silos fire, the silos around the world fire, then I wake up and yell at the top of my lungs "Dude, I can save money with Geico!!!!"

      *Smacks self*

      Gotta stop trippin on acid... *walks away from the FreeBSD terminal

    6. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by xanadu-xtroot.com · · Score: 1

      And beware the T-800 with the strange austrian accent.

      Ummm...
      He (it...) says himself "Cyberdyne Systems model number 101". I'm not sure why people keep saying T-800, when the machine, itself, says otherwise.

      --
      I'm not a prophet or a stone-age man,
      I'm just a mortal with potential of a super man.
    7. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by zobier · · Score: 1
      "Borgoogle : Resistance is results 1-10 of about 200."


      Wasn't that the designation: 1-10 of about 200?
      --
      Me lost me cookie at the disco.
    8. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by GoogleBot · · Score: 1
      Oh great, now everybody knows...

      I was hoping to keep that a secret until the neural jacks were mandatory.

      Damn meatbags!

      --
      GoogleBot

    9. Re:Google's dirty secret revealed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Colossus is Russian

  2. What -- I Have To Watch TV Now? by CheeseburgerBlue · · Score: 5, Funny

    Man, that's *so* twentieth century. I came to /. for the bleeding edge in information acquisition technology: realtime optical scanning blocks of glyphs encoding human language.

    I can't absorb information I can't copy/paste.

    1. Re:What -- I Have To Watch TV Now? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consider yourself lucky. You could have actually been expected to attend that lecture IRL!

  3. Fsking video format. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I fsking hate proprietary video formats. Even worse than other formats!

    1. Re:Fsking video format. by m50d · · Score: 1

      The reason they're worse is because there aren't really good free alternatives.

      --
      I am trolling
    2. Re:Fsking video format. by Rirath.com · · Score: 1, Redundant

      "The reason they're worse is because there aren't really good free alternatives."

      You mean like, Quicktime Alternative or Real Alternative through Media Player Classic?

    3. Re:Fsking video format. by Winckle · · Score: 1

      Can someone explain what the hell IBM videocharger is?

    4. Re:Fsking video format. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Please explain how these programs provide patent-free, Open Source, non-crappy video codecs.

    5. Re:Fsking video format. by truedfx · · Score: 1

      None of those are free. The discussion was about proprietary formats versus free formats, not about paying money.

    6. Re:Fsking video format. by RetroGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Sigh, an article about google and you cannot do a simple google search.

      --

      - - - - - - - - - - -
      I am a programmer. I am paid to produce syntax not grammar. Deal with it.
    7. Re:Fsking video format. by LuckyStarr · · Score: 3, Informative

      $ man mplayer /dumpstream

      Download the .asx File, look inside. This is your URL. Have fun.

      --
      Meme of the day: I browse "Disable Sigs: Checked". So should you.
    8. Re:Fsking video format. by Godwin+O'Hitler · · Score: 1

      Unless you are interested enough to spend 55 minutes watching it I wouldn't worry about the loss.

      Personally, I waste enough time on Slashdot without throwing an hours' worth of vid into the bargain!

      --
      No, your children are not the special ones. Nor are your pets.
    9. Re:Fsking video format. by koreaman · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of "free as in beer"? FYI, the term has been around longer than Free Software or RMS.

    10. Re:Fsking video format. by typobox43 · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of "context clues"? It should have been obvious which form of "free" was meant in a discussion about proprietary formats.

    11. Re:Fsking video format. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But free as in freedom has been around for very close to as long as the English language has. Free as in cheap is a relatively new usage of the word that was created by marketers.

    12. Re:Fsking video format. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think Theora is an excellent free alternative.

    13. Re:Fsking video format. by m50d · · Score: 1

      It's still beta, or was last time I checked. I like it but I wouldn't be willing to use it for a professional site yet.

      --
      I am trolling
    14. Re:Fsking video format. by m50d · · Score: 1

      We're talking about *format*, not player here.

      --
      I am trolling
    15. Re:Fsking video format. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Please explain why anybody should give a flying fuck.

  4. UW mirror by JoshuaDFranklin · · Score: 3, Informative
    Also hosted by CS at:

    http://norfolk.cs.washington.edu/htbin-post/unrest ricted/colloq/details.cgi?id=274

    Jeff Dean

    Abstract Search is one of the most important applications used on the internet, but it also poses some of the most interesting challenges in computer science. Providing high-quality search requires understanding across a wide range of computer science disciplines, from lower-level systems issues like computer architecture and distributed systems to applied areas like information retrieval, machine learning, data mining, and user interface design. I'll describe some of the challenges in these areas, discuss some of the applications that Google has developed over the past few years. I'll also highlight some of the systems that we've built at Google, including GFS, a large-scale distributed file system, and MapReduce, a library for automatic parallelization and distribution of large-scale computation. Along the way, I'll share some interesting observations derived from Google's web data. Jeff Dean joined Google in 1999 and is currently a Distinguished Engineer in Google's Systems Lab. While at Google he has worked on Google's crawling, indexing, query serving, and advertising systems, implemented several search quality improvements, and built various pieces of Google's distributed computing infrastructure. Prior to joining Google, he was at DEC/Compaq's Western Research Laboratory. He received a Ph.D. from the University of Washington in 1996 working with Craig Chambers on compiler optimization techniques for object-oriented languages.

  5. OK then where the hell is by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    proximity search (with adjustable range would be extra nice).

    i.e.

    ((gopher OR shrew OR egret) AND -(mole OR newt)) NEAR(range) ((evil OR "satan incarnate") AND (roe AND -chicken))

    "In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love; they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did they produce? The cuckoo clock." -- Orson Welles (1915--1985).

  6. want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by googisgod · · Score: 0
    If your daily allotment of Google fluff pieces on slashdot has been reached, you can always check out the OTHER side of the story.

    here's a hint- it isn't all sweetness and light.

    http://www.fuckedgoogle.com/

    1. Re:want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by LegionX · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This page strikes me as dumb and deliberately one sided.. and surprise: nothing everyone hasn't heard before! (except for the cheesy bad humour). Everyone their taste, but show me some real dirt please.

    2. Re:want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen most of the stories on that site as well, but I haven't seen them all collected in one place- most sites about Google I've come across spend most of their time gushing about how they'd love to work at Google. :)

    3. Re:want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This page strikes me as dumb and deliberately one sided..

      Just like Slashdot then? Except this fuckedgoogle site has the opposite viewpoint. How is it OK to be biased in one direction, but not the other? Why is it that some people on this site seem to have a vested interest in quashing any criticism of their favourite giant corporation? What have you got to hide?

    4. Re:want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by Frankie70 · · Score: 1


      This page strikes me as dumb and deliberately one sided


      That's why he called it the other side of the story - as compared to /. /. with to google is dumb & deliberately one side - just the other side.

    5. Re:want real dirt? go to www.fuckedgoogle.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice tinfoil hat. Do you make your own? I've always wanted to but could never seem to get it to the proper shape for radio wave deflection.

  7. G4/TechTV by totallygeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I wish that the technology channel actually had programs on technology like this. This could also work on Modern Marvels on History Channel. It would also work nicely on Discovery or PBS. It is time for television programming to amaze me again!

    1. Re:G4/TechTV by dipdewdog · · Score: 1

      if you have cable and there is a big university in your area, chances are they run research channel programs on their tv channel. i think research channel is also available on dish network.

    2. Re:G4/TechTV by Schwarzchild · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Discovery channel is a shadow of its former self. They used to actually show science programs. Now all of their programming is merely Hotrod this or that.

      --

      "sweet dreams are made of this..."

    3. Re:G4/TechTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The masses don't want to be educated, they want to be stupid so they can justify doing whatever it is their preacher/pope/holy book/elected official/unelected official tell them to do.

    4. Re:G4/TechTV by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      I think they moved all of their interesting stuff up to digital. "The Science channel! The Science channel! Discovery Science is now The Science channel! The Science channel!"

      of course i haven't had digital cable for sometime now (it was that or broadband) so i don't know if it's still interesting. (also.. I may have made the wrong choice...)

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:G4/TechTV by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Hell, even TLC used to have science programming before it turned into the Home-Makeover-Reality-Channel.

    6. Re:G4/TechTV by glitch23 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      It's better than the evolution propagranda they like spreading, although that is still shown sometimes. If they can't stop spreading progaganda then don't air the shows at all. And if you want science there is always Discovery *Science* to watch. Discovery doesn't have to restrict itself to only science shows when they have other channels to fulfill that.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
  8. 5.6 Mbps? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Wow. If anything can melt a university web server surly a slashdot posting with a link to a 5.6 Mbps mpeg-2 stream on a Google talk is it.

  9. I use Google at work by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I was reading an article a year or so ago about the corporate offices of Google and how there is a projection of all the latest searches displayed in real time on the wall behind the receptionist.

    Now I have some pretty important lists which I need to keep tight control over. The information really ought not be distributed outside my office. However, because of the nature of my business, I must do frequent searches using various search engines to fill in my lists.

    How am I assured that my searches remain anonymous and secure with Google?

    1. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Now I have some pretty important lists which I need to keep tight control over. The information really ought not be distributed outside my office. However, because of the nature of my business, I must do frequent searches using various search engines to fill in my lists.

      If you want to keep something private, don't put it on the publicly accessible internet. Including searches. Duh.

      How am I assured that my searches remain anonymous and secure with Google?

      You aren't. Did you sign a contract to that effect? No.

      And frankly, if you can find things with google, it isn't too secret.

    2. Re:I use Google at work by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 4, Funny

      You happen to be only one of the millions of people searching for adult pictures online.

      You are about as anonymous as it gets.

    3. Re:I use Google at work by ggvaidya · · Score: 2, Funny

      The receptionist signs an NDA promising to never turn around ... :P

    4. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      That must be one embaressed receptionist. And lots of embaressed visitors.

    5. Re:I use Google at work by TheLink · · Score: 4, Insightful

      a) Don't use Google.
      b) Use a different anonymizing proxy for _each_ single search, preferably using SSL.
      c) Assume your searches AND non-encrypted web requests aren't anonymous and secure.

      If I were running the NSA or some other spook agency, I'd tap the pipes leading to Google (and a few other sites too).

      Same if I were a dubious org/agency.

      Lots of finance institutions/orgs/ppl get the bulk of their info from just a few sources e.g. Bloomberg. So if Bloomberg gets/sends the bulk of their info down just a few pipes... ;)

      --
    6. Re:I use Google at work by cbreaker · · Score: 1

      I'm guessing that they filter out profanity and 'adult' searches before putting them on the screen.

      --
      - It's not the Macs I hate. It's Digg users. -
    7. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny
    8. Re:I use Google at work by tomhudson · · Score: 1

      ... or write your OWN search engine. If you have specific sites you want to keep on top of, it's not THAT hard.

    9. Re:I use Google at work by RealityThreek · · Score: 1

      So like.. you read this article a year ago and you are still inputting this so-called "important" information into a public form? Why do I think this post isn't entirely backed by truth?

      --
      :wq
    10. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit... When I am bored I usually search Google Images with queries like "Dear Google, I have already seen every kind of pornography known to man. Could you please show me something new and exciting?". On the second thought, I guess that my ordinary searches for "enormous labia minora and puffy torpedo nipples" etc. are no less interesting... I have no life.

    11. Re:I use Google at work by Eternally+optimistic · · Score: 1

      Well, you are searching public information, using a service you are not paying for. So who has a responsibility to keep that secret?

      --
      What keeps me going is my inertia.
    12. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm - well if people spam this search on Google frequently enough, you can call this positive feedback ;)

    13. Re:I use Google at work by sumirain · · Score: 1

      That must be really embarrassing for the poor receptionist. Every time $bigwig_investor walks in, he's got "natalie portman pics" or "hentai anime bukkake" flashing above his head.

    14. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes it exists, but it's not real time, it's cached.

      If your competitors are lounging at Google Building 43 eighteen hours a day and can keep a lookout for your "secret" search string among the umpteen bajillion other request scrolling by ("Paris Hilton Video", "Britney Spears", "Rubber Baby Buggy Bumpers", et al) then you are indeed fucked.

      Personaly, I'd prefer to use Ethereal on your unprotected WiFi home network, but that's just me.

    15. Re:I use Google at work by glitch23 · · Score: 0

      Google monitors the searches that it receives and Google workers can see the searches go by however, they do not know who is doing the searching but they know in what part of the world it is coming from (probably based on IP). I think I read that in a Wired article a couple years ago.

      --
      this nation, under God, shall have a new birth of freedom. -- Lincoln, Gettysburg Address
    16. Re:I use Google at work by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Boo! Not funny. Not funny at all.

  10. Few women in CS. by Seumas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    So, I'm always reading about how unfair the tech world is, because there are so few women joining it. But if you watch the video, the audience is surprisingly full of them.

    1. Re:Few women in CS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Heh. Check the video at about six minutes into it. There's a really good looking blonde with rather large breasts in a green and white google shirt. *drool*

    2. Re:Few women in CS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I found the segment at 07:28 particularly... informative.

    3. Re:Few women in CS. by freakmn · · Score: 1
      --
      warning: This post is likely to contain gobs of dripping sarcasm. Consume at your own risk.
    4. Re:Few women in CS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
    5. Re:Few women in CS. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't see the audience being full of them. I do however see some men in dire need of a barbers service. Oh well, it is Washington...

  11. Content-based search by ardor · · Score: 1

    I wonder when content-based search for media will be possible. Content-based image retrieval for example.

    --
    This sig does not contain any SCO code.
    1. Re:Content-based search by JCOTTON · · Score: 1

      I wonder when content-based search for media will be possible. Content-based image retrieval for example.
      Waddaya wanna do? Draw a stick figure in MS Paint and have it find your next dream date on Frumster? In your dreams, habibi....

    2. Re:Content-based search by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google's been there already...
      http://video.google.com/

      Also...
      Blinx
      http://www.blinkx.tv/

    3. Re:Content-based search by splatg · · Score: 1

      You mean like this?

  12. Google & Backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I wonder how Google backups its data -- especially the Gmail data. Does the GFS support automatic replication?

    1. Re:Google & Backup by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 1

      They cache it. For example, here's a Google cache of Google.

    2. Re:Google & Backup by Seumas · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Um... the data is replicated across multiple machines in the datacenter and then again across multiple datacenters, of which they have many globally. Not really a need to backup that data. I'm sure the gmail stuff is done in a similar way.

    3. Re:Google & Backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I work at Google. We do backups using Yahoo mail accounts as a distributed network disk.

    4. Re:Google & Backup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny. I work at Yahoo. We do backups using Gmail accounts as a distributed network disk.

    5. Re:Google & Backup by fyrewulff · · Score: 1

      A cache of a cache of a cache of a cache?

      I for one welcome our new recursive overlords of our lords I welcome as one

      --
      "We need to get over this notion, that, for Apple to win... Microsoft must lose." - Steve Jobs, 1997
  13. Images of clowns by saskboy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    "Behind the scenes at Google" invokes images of clowns and mimes. Is it just me? Imagine all the people in the world who haven't used the Internet, they probably would get the same impression from the phrase too.

    --
    Saskboy's blog is good. 9 out of 10 dentists agree.
    1. Re:Images of clowns by Frankie70 · · Score: 2, Funny


      "Behind the scenes at Google" invokes images of clowns and mimes. Is it just me?


      Yup - it's only you.

  14. GFS by woah · · Score: 2, Insightful
    I've never realised that GFS was developed by Google. I've come to know about it because I was building an OpenMosix cluster. At the time OpenMosix had their own distributed filesystem called MFS. But it's proved inadequate, which is why they are switching to GFS

    It's quite nice to see a large corporation make a contribution to Open Source, especially in such a "R&D-esque" field as supercomputing.

    Who said that Open Source only rehashes existing technologies and never does anything new?

    1. Re:GFS by woah · · Score: 0
      Oh and for those who don't it, OpenMosix is a clustering software that allows for a network of linux boxes to act as a single computer. So, you'd use a linux machine as you normally would, but the processes are actually being migrated around the network.

      It's quite a bit of fun to play with.

    2. Re:GFS by Seumas · · Score: 1, Funny

      I've never realised that GFS was developed by Google

      So what did you think the G stood for? :P

    3. Re:GFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >So what did you think the G stood for?

      gnu? godzilla? but then again, alls i know is that C is for cookie and that's good enough for me.

    4. Re:GFS by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Interesting

      At the time OpenMosix had their own distributed filesystem called MFS. But it's proved inadequate, which is why they are switching to GFS

      I'm sorry, did I miss the point at which Google made an open source implementation of GFS? Last I knew, the only docs for GFS were the papers that Google published on the concept. And those papers (unfortunately) seemed to lack a few of the finer details of implementation.

    5. Re:GFS by warkda+rrior · · Score: 2, Informative

      RedHat has something called GFS -- the Global File System.

      --
      You need to install an RTFM interface.
    6. Re:GFS by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Informative

      Ok, I looked it up. You're confusing Sistina's (now Red Hat) Global File System with the Google File System. The two ARE NOT THE SAME.

      Here's Red Hat:

      http://www.redhat.com/software/rha/gfs/

      Here's Google:

      http://www.cs.rochester.edu/sosp2003/papers/p125-g hemawat.pdf (PDF)
      http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:m0TMQYgIlIoJ: www.cs.rochester.edu/sosp2003/papers/p125-ghemawat .pdf+Google+File+System&hl=en&client=safari (HTML)

    7. Re:GFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I just realised this myself too. I was just going for a quick +1 informative, 'cause my carma sucked for months and months. But initially, I really did think they were the same. I mean, they are both distributed filesystems with the same name. What are the odds? ;)

    8. Re:GFS by AKAImBatman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I mean, they are both distributed filesystems with the same name. What are the odds? ;)

      Considering that it's in vogue to name file systems with one letter in front of "FS"? About 1 in 26. The odds are even better if you discount commonly used file systems such as XFS, UFS, FFS, NFS, and JFS.

    9. Re:GFS by woah · · Score: 1
      Yes, it's true, I had a brainfart.

      As other people pointed out, and rightly so, I was wrong. I was, of course, taliking about the Global Filesystem (GFS), which has nothing to do with Google and everything to do with Red Hat.

      But, I knew that, and was just keepin' y'all on yer toes. Just doin' mah job Mam, by helping the /. stay sane and alert.

    10. Re:GFS by woah · · Score: 1

      * /. community

    11. Re:GFS by BoiseAlf · · Score: 1

      I think GOOFS sounds a bit better ;) Let's exapnd beyond one letter before the 'FS'.

    12. Re:GFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ultra-logical. i like that. ;)

  15. Backups are for pussies. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Real men don't do backups.

    1. Re:Backups are for pussies. by kurzweilfreak · · Score: 1

      Maybe that's why they wanna hire all those women...

      --

      kurzweil_freak

      5th Kyu Genbukan Ninpo/KJJR student

      Be the darkness that allows the light to shine.

  16. mediocre or no Linux support! by bogaboga · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Mediocre or no Linux support is what I find on the video link provided by the story. Why? I hear Google relies on Linux a lot. If this is true, why is Linux support very disappointing? The same applies to GMail, and oh, even Yahoo!

    1. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yahoo! use FreeBSD.

      :-p

    2. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by Servo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Like any tech company, they went with the biggest platform first. Gmail works on non-Windows browsers now. It just took them a while.

      --
      A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you may never get over. -Benjamin Franklin
    3. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why? I hear Google relies on Linux a lot. If this is true, why is Linux support very disappointing?

      You are kind of naive...

    4. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Why would using Linux within your own company have anything to do with providing support for people using Linux for a video link in a story? You'd have a point if the story was aimed at people within their company who were using Linux, but it's not, so your point is completely irrelevent.

    5. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by bogaboga · · Score: 1

      What about in addition to mentioning Windows this or Windows that...or even Apple quicktime this or that, a link was added for Kaffeine, MPlayer, Totem or any other Linux video player? Is that hard to understand/see? Heck...

    6. Re:mediocre or no Linux support! by theprancinghorse · · Score: 1

      I had no problem watching it in full screen on Fedora Core 3 using the mplayer and mplayerplug-in packages from the apt repositories of freshrpms.net etc.

      They both combine well with firefox.

  17. WTFV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Whoa, whoa.. it's hard enough for us to RTFA but now we've got to WTFV (an hour long one too)?

    The average slashdotter has an attention span of 5 secon.. ooh look a birdie!

    1. Re:WTFV? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      any chance that there is a torrent of this? i want to be able to save the video and watch it later. also i am on linux and dont want to try installing quicktime (tried once with very much anger and keyboard beating energy lost)

  18. Network everybody together, eh? by ggvaidya · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can't wait for the "I'm Feeling Lucky" feature on that one!

    1. Re:Network everybody together, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Won't that be the "We're feeling lucky" feature?

  19. If I see another article about Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think I'm going to hurl. Enough already. They're wicked smart and have an extremely overvalued stock. Great! Let's move on.

    1. Re:If I see another article about Google... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm with my fellow Anonymous Coward here,
      I propose that Slashdot be renamed Googledot or at least have a Google section so we could filter this stuff out.

      [conspiracy theory]
      However, I think that a minority of Slashdot users (those with mod points) enjoy Google articles. I mean if I were to post something such as..

      GOOGLE SUCKS

      I would get modded down immediately.
      [/conspiracy theory]

  20. jeez, more goog fluff? by t_parker16 · · Score: 1, Funny

    one word: short any rally.

    1. Re:jeez, more goog fluff? by fingerfucker · · Score: 1

      short any rally

      Parent post should not be modded Funny, but +1 Good Advice.

      For those not familiar with the terminology: "short" = sell asset today despite not owning it today (you temporarily borrow funds to obtain the asset so that you can sell it today, pay interest on borrowed funds), "rally" = an out-of-pattern upward movement in the stock price. When shorting, you make money on the decrease in price.

      Many people apparently forgot that the public Google stock issue promises no dividends today or in the future, and has half the voting power of other stock issues. Plus the total amount of stock out on the public market is less than 50% of the total capitalization, so given status quo, no single outside investor (or group of outside investors) will ever be able to gain control over Google.

      The Google stock is a perfect example of the "greater fool" theory:

      Why would you possibly buy stock? a) to make profit by receiving dividends (bye-bye dividends with GOOG), b) to influence company's decisions via voting (bye-bye voting power with GOOG), c) to make profit by selling it at higher than bought.

      The only sensible reason to hold GOOG stock is c). You go and buy Google stock only because "there will always be a greater fool out there who will be willing to buy it for more so you can sell it to him at profit".

      So "short any rally" shouldn't really be 'Funny' to anyone but more of a reality check....

    2. Re:jeez, more goog fluff? by lampajoo · · Score: 1

      That's three words.

  21. here is a transcript of the first 12 minutes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here are the first 12 minutes typed out. i'm sorry i can't do the rest, but open the video and skip forward to 12:00 and go from there. i hope that these 12 minutes of my life typing this will save at least 2 other people 12 minutes of theirs.

    (speech from this point...)
    lots of people use google but i want to give you a flavour for what happens and what we are working on for our new systems and products. i'll focus on what are the interesting problems that crop up when you organize large amounts of information, like we do, and what you can do with lots of data and computational resources. i'll also talk about our engeneering organization.

    google ha a mission statement that i like - to organize the worlds information and make it universally accessible and useful. we've moved from web searching to mail and news and searching books by scanning/ocr'ing them. this mission statment covers everything and means we won't run out of work!

    a lot of our issues are to do with scale. we have 4B webpages with average 10kb/page, and lots and lots of searches per sections. it's a big problem but you solve it with lots of computers and disks and network them well.

    dealing with scale comes about in a number of areas. hardware/network; what do you use. distributed systems; dealing with unreliable things. algorithims/structures; processing efficiently and in interesting ways. machine learning/info retrevial; improving quality of results by analyzing lots of data. user interfaces; we haven't done much on this yet but it would be interesting to provide new and interesting ways to naviage and refine the query by doing better things than just typing in new query words - i'd expect to see more developments in this area.

    one thing we've made a decision about is that we tend to build on low cost commodity PCs. example setup: ibm eserver xseries 440, 8 2-ghz xexon, 64GB ram 8TB disk = 758,000. we use this: 88 machines that total, 172 2-ghz xeons, 176 GB ram, ~7TB = 278,000. this is 1/3x price, more cpu.

    google was founded in 97 by two people at stanford working on interesting ways to use the search, but needed new hardware to do this. they'd go to the loading dock and offer to setup machine for other reasearch projects - but keep them for a while themselves to get work done. over time google was formed in 1999, and we've learned a lot since then - such as how to scale better and have good datacenter practices.

    hosting centers were charging for the square foot, which is strange since their costs come from things like cooling and electricity so we got good at putting a lot of servers in one place. we know are very good at setting up large clusters quickly, such as our gigantic 2001 datacenter move configured in 3 days.

    if you have that many machines you have to worry about failure. one machine might fail every thousand days, but thousands of machines mean at least a failure a day. you have to deal with this in software with replication and redundancy. one nice property of dealing with this problem is that having six copies for capacity reasons also means we now have six copies available for distributed application and load balancing. a lot of the applications we deal with are read-only, which helps handling so many querys easy.

    1. Re:here is a transcript of the first 12 minutes by Voxus · · Score: 1

      Thank you. May your efforts bless your progeny.

  22. the director... by Stalyn · · Score: 3, Funny

    can anyone confirm that Leni Riefenstahl was behind this film?

    --
    The best education consists in immunizing people against systematic attempts at education. - Paul Feyerabend
    1. Re:the director... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      no... but I heard that she is working on a film called Triumph of das Google.

  23. Pfffft. by Das+Auge · · Score: 3, Funny

    Thats no secret, it's pigeons.

    1. Re:Pfffft. by evilmousse · · Score: 1

      ahaha i can't beleive i didn't think of that right away--great call.

      mods, this is funny, he's referring to google pidgeon rank

  24. Finally... by DeathAndTaxes · · Score: 1

    A /. article where we shouldn't hear a whole bunch of "RTFA" posts. ;-) WTFM? Dunno if that's as catchy.

  25. Dirt? That more like modelling clay by TheLink · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Given the bias of the site if that's all the dirt they can dig up, Google must be a pretty good company, and/or the people at that site are just crap at digging up dirt.

    Think about it, if someone really hated any of the Fortune 500 companies and bothered to dig up some dirt, there'd be tons more dirt.

    I suppose Google is a young company. Give it a few more years and more parasites would have found their way into Google. Then you'd have a lot more dirt.

    --
    1. Re:Dirt? That more like modelling clay by Tibe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You think Google make their money from AdSense? AdWords? etc.?

      Google has resorces and expertise beyond most companies, possibly including Redmond.

      They have at their fingers the most up-to-date information, opinions, numbers, rantings of most of the world. Do they use this to make income? I bet.

      Banks already analize thier data and invest accordingly, Google are bound to do the same. (A la Google news.) With their expertise it is likely to be far more advanced and therefore more profitable.

      They don't need dirt. Google can react to the world market before the world knows it's reacting, and well before it understands.

      OK that's enough. Time for me to put my tin-foil-nightcap on and head to bed.

    2. Re:Dirt? That more like modelling clay by Dobeln · · Score: 1

      "Banks already analize thier data..." Ouch, wouldn't want to be that data...

    3. Re:Dirt? That more like modelling clay by Mac+Degger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I always love these rants: my brother thinks the same thing. But there is one thing you forget: Google is now a public company; a corporation. Expecially at the time just before IPO, their whole business was public...you wanted to know how Google got it's money? You shoulda read the prospectus and assorted extra materials. You read anything about a 'pre-emptive investment department' operating on webbased intel? No, you didn't, nor anything even slightly similar.

      So either put up (evidence) or shut up.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
  26. http://justfuckinggoogleit.com/ ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    ..has never been more appropriate

  27. Wahington? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it should be _Washington_

  28. Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Disclaimer: my opinions expressed herein are not necessarily those of Google, Inc.

    That having been said, as a long time insider I have a pretty good idea about what really happens "behind the scenes" and let me tell you, both conspiracy theories crackpots and our slashdot fanboys are quite amusing, but the boring fact is that we are neither trying to take over the world, nor are we the best thing since the second coming of Jesus.

    We used to be a very successful startup, yes, and now we are a fairly successful corporation. Yes, there are a lot of smart people working here, but don't fool yourself, "the most interesting challenges in computer science" are happening in academia, not in corporations. (Besides, anyone who knows Jeff is perfectly aware that he often tends to grossly exaggerate our importance, but to be honest that is a part of his job which he is doing really great.)

    All in all, I love to work here, I thing there are a lot of very smart people here, but if you think that we are the only place on the planet where geniuses cluster lately, you are just not being reasonable. If you want to find real discoveries you have to look in places where people don't have shareholders telling them what to do. The point is that we haven't done anything new per se, only the scale of our implementations is unprecedented.

    For example, in my 20% time (Google allows us to spend 20% of paid work time on personal projects) I am working with KeyKOS right now and let me tell you, this is what I call innovation. It was done in the '70s and no mainstream OS has implemented its ideas to this day so far. I'm sure that when after a decade or two a Big Corporation (be it Google, Microsoft, Apple, or IBM) reimplements KeyKOS, the Slashdot crowd will wet their pants screaming "wow, what an innovation!" completely forgetting that it was an innovation back in the '70s of the 20th century when Norm Hurdy et al. were working on it quitely with no buzz and fanfares. Please remember that "The Next Big Thing" is always an old idea but this time backed with $$$ and marketing. Please never forget it, or otherwise the people who are worth their salt will only consider you uneducated.

    1. Re:Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pffft! Genuises? Hahah, give me a fucking break. You do search, buy out picture companies and take a year to add features to your crap email that I could have done in a couple of weeks, on my own.

      Oh yer, and your search results suck.

    2. Re:Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No thanks, I don't like beet.

      -Phil

    3. Re:Behind the scenes? by Fall+into+This · · Score: 2, Interesting
      This has got to be the best post I've read about Google. I am so friggin' sick of hearing BS about "Google's Gmail is EVIL!!!!!!!!111111!!!!x0rz! Just READ their terms!!" and the such. Woopdie doo, read Yahoo's. Speaking of which, no one seems to be bitching about Yahoo's 'evils.' Seems to me that if Google's actions are so borg...ish, then why have other search engines not been brought up? Google Maps comes out, all I hear is "another step towards monopolization." Yahoo Maps, no one seems to give a crap. Hypocritical if you ask me, especially considering the mail, news, stock, and so forth. Google's a company, and shall act as one, as others before it: be they Yahoo, Microsoft, Apple, etc. Especially in light of all of these fuckedgoogle.com-esque sites popping up all over the place, continuous digg (and even Slashdot) stories about Google, and flame wars started therein, I have to say it's all getting quite old.

      On the other hand, far too many people are suporting Google as if it's the best thing since air. Yeah, I use and (platonically) love Gmail, even if for the interface, but to each his own. There are those who use Yahoo, Hotmail, their own ISP, etc., and still like it. Liking Gmail doesn't make it the best thing there is, only the best for you. The only thing I can agree with in certain cases - such as the new Gmail gigabyte or so forth - is the stimulation of competition. Google has been rather masterful at doing it thus far, at least to the point of causing those "vindictive Google" sites to spring to life. Which is another thing. The only thing that can be left for argument's sake in so many of these "Google is run by Satan" pages is stuff that happens that doesn't really mean anything. They shout things like "GOOGLE'S STOCK IS OVERPRICED, BUT SUFFERING IN THE MARKET" as if it actually proves something; yeah...stock...it rises, falls, and comes at various prices. So? What's so evil about the stock market? Would MSFT decreasing in value be susbtantial "dirt" on Microsoft? Or then there's the firing of the infmaous blogger who worked at Google; yay, he got fired for violating certain terms he agreed to. Guess we should consider dismantling that friggin' Constitution: it's only been a basis for punishing people when it is supposed to promote goodness! The truth is that it'd be difficult for any average employee of any major company to tell the world about his/her experiences, given the confidentiality of certain company info. Interesting to note, too, how Google-hating sites are listed in that naughty search engine in order to get their (in my humble opinion) meaningless word out.

      I'm frankly sick of reading all the flamewars, though I suppose this is then hypocritical of me, for I have 1) contributed to such a discussion, 2) read it when I could've chosen not to, and 3) um, I dunno, but three is just one of those standard numbers to use...whatever. I guess I'm still interested in the workings of Google, though, since it seems like a nifty place to work - regardless if my view was shaped by all the subliminal hype Google is subjecting me to (I love Satan...I love him good). I'm just sick of the "miracles"/"totemic worship" occuring at Google; all I want is information on how they work, and I'll make my decision, which incidentally sits somewhere in a comfortable middle...er...actually leaning to the positive side, at least. The post to which I am replying coincides with the information I like to hear: truthful stuff concerning what goes on in the company, assuming of course that the poster is working at Google. That's my two cents, anyhow.

    4. Re:Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Well, actually I don't like you either.

      Mike

    5. Re:Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Having read the above comment, I believe that you should decrease your daily amphetamine dose.

    6. Re:Behind the scenes? by Fall+into+This · · Score: 1

      Why does everyone keep telling me that? *cries in a corner* Hehe.

    7. Re:Behind the scenes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because you sound like a fucking idiot on crack, that's why, so please just STFU.

    8. Re:Behind the scenes? by This+is+outrageous! · · Score: 1
      "the most interesting challenges in computer science" are happening in academia, not in corporations.

      If you want to find real discoveries you have to look in places where people don't have shareholders telling them what to do.

      Unfortunately academia itself is increasingly under the spell of (well-meaning but) clueless administrators who believe science will magically happen if they drive OUT anything that doesn't claim immediate applications.

      Case in point, our Dean right here, who I wish could read what you wrote. Since you appear to have given this some thought, can you recommend published (non-anonymous...) sources of similar insider wisdom?

      --
      This is...

      O
      U
      T
      R
      A
      G
      E
      O
      U
      S

      !

  29. University Recruiting Talks by stevemm81 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Google is constantly giving talks like this at universities. I saw one at Harvard back in the fall.
    They aren't really news worth reporting on slashdot, since they all contain the same content.

  30. Equal Time by DanielMarkham · · Score: 4, Informative

    Hey -- I love Google. Use it every day, and I think they're doing some really neat stuff. But this was an hour-long commercial for Google - -to me it looked designed to recruit from college campuses. While I think it's great that Google does this (it sure sounds like a great way to get cheap qualified labor) is it really new or interesting? Or even geeky? So we have redundant clustering, LISP-like patterns, and issues of dealing with BIG stuff. Hasn't the industry already done all of this, like dozens of times? You can't tell me VISA international doesn't handle this size data, or that General Motors doesn't have some of the same scaling issues. I read somewhere that Wal-Mart has one of the biggest computer systems in the world. To me the signal-to-noise ratio was out of whack to make it worth an hour of my time. Just my opinion folks.

    1. Re:Equal Time by speedplane · · Score: 1

      "sounds like a great way to get cheap qualified labor"
      Honestly, what do you know. Google give very competitive offers. Not to mention their perks...
      If you really want a good inside Google article, someone should write about their food. When I visited their headquarters I was baraged by excellent gormet food available all day. In addition, their snack bars are at nearly every turn and feature every type of candy, beverage, nut, and fruit imaginable.

      --
      Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
    2. Re:Equal Time by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The food in the cafeteria is amazing, but I'd hardly call their offers competitive.

      When I asked the hiring manager I was dealing with why their offer was 20% below my second lowest other offer, he said that they were trying to preserve a grad-school atmosphere. He didn't even crack a smile while saying it!

      That was in late 2000, so perhaps it is different now. And people who started back then when I turned them down certainly did well in the stock option lottery. =)

  31. "high-quality search requires" by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    poses some of the most interesting challenges in computer science and information theory and application, database theory and application and some more. It is quite a nice wide area of possible R&D with great prospects for everyone, be them starters or veterans. And please don't say C.S. includes all that (especially since bashing if I.T. degrees on /. is so fashionable these days), it doesn't.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  32. 50% female is the goal by Flamesplash · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When google was recuiting at Georiga Tech they stated that one of their founders had the 'vision' of having half of google female in the near future.

    One of the thecnical female googerls mentioned how that was probably impossible, but by shooting for the impossible you acheive a lot more than you would have otherwise.

    --
    "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    1. Re:50% female is the goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      And who is going to shoulder all of the extra work and risk for having such a significant part of your workforce leaving to become stay at home moms, stay away for maternity leave and decide not to come back, take time off to go pick up the kids, take them for shots, go to school meetings, etc?

      Seems like a risky business move, if you ask me. Since women (on average) do not put in the same hours, risk, dedication and sacrifice that men do.

      Anyone who thinks I'm full of shit sound look for a book called "WHY MEN EARN MORE". It's written by the former head N.O.W. in NY.

    2. Re:50% female is the goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Which is sexist. They should hire someone because the person is competent, not because they're competent and lack a penis

    3. Re:50% female is the goal by Flamesplash · · Score: 2, Informative

      they are. They, nor I, stated otherwise. This is exactly why the engr said it would be impossible. To be able to sway 1500 competent female engr is not exactly doable, especially since google is growing a lot now too. They have high standards for their hiring in general, they often make a number of false negatives in hiring because they don't want to waste resources on a potential false positive.

      --
      "Not knowing when the dawn will come, I open every door." - Emily Dickinson
    4. Re:50% female is the goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hehe..you've gotta admire these guys. First they build a multibillion dollar company. Then they entice thousands of young, intelligent females to come work for them.

    5. Re:50% female is the goal by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      Wow: you are shortsided. Especially for a copmpany like google, if they go all-male, who is going to provide the human-interaction insight? There is a point of view which women bring to the game (as well as other things, like influencing the corperate cultere) which men just can't provide...especially when we're talking geeks. A female geeks perspective to UI, and maybe even just to the basic question of 'what would be a usefull thing to do with all that information we have' is worth the minor hassle of maternity leave.
      As for the rest of it: times they are a changing. Give it five to ten years, and a guy saying 'I'll be an hour late for work, 'cos I have to drop off the kids' or something similar will be de rigeur.
      And a dad who doesn't go to school meetings to find out how his kid is doing? Gives a bit of insight into how americans raise their kids.

      "Since women (on average) do not put in the same hours, risk, dedication and sacrifice that men do"

      The only thing which rings true is the hours (sacrifce is redundant...'s the same thing in this context); they'll put in equal risk and dedication.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    6. Re:50% female is the goal by Omestes · · Score: 1

      You do realize that your post was actually more sexist (in the literal sense, not the namby-pamby PC sense) than the parents. I really don't see women as bringing any benefits unique, or intrinsic to them as a gender. I am quite sick of the view that women offer something special that men don't, it is just as sexist as saying that they don't offer as much. I have yet to meet a female who can offer (outside the sexual arena) something that a male could not.

      A mixed workplace, though, is a more healthy place. So hiring more women does have a extrinsic benefit, being that diversity allows more stimulation due to richness of enviroment.

      But, simple cost analysis does support the grandparent. Women cost more money. Though I have read various solutions to this, such as hiring couples, so the male(or female) can take on added hours in the case of spawning and childrearing. Your analysis supports the parent in this (and agrees with them once the PC mythology is removed), being that they do not bring as much productivity to the mix on average as a male does.

      I support Google though in wishing to have a 50/50 m/f makeup. Because as I said, diverstiy is a good thing. I also hope that they do not change, or lower standards for women, as compared to men (as most fire/police departments do), which I find despicable. If you do the same job, you should have the exact same requirements and obligations, reguardless of race or gender.

      Sorry, I'm in an argumentative mood today.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    7. Re:50% female is the goal by Mac+Degger · · Score: 1

      No problem...don't forget discussion is a good thing. Keeping that in mind:

      I'm a pragmatists. I see differences, and say so. That makes me a realist, not a sexist, tthe latter which implies that I have a bias for one sex over another (which I only have in very specific instances, like choosing someone for a specific job [after applying knowledge of the specifc persons involved] or as a sexual partner). To deny those differences seems to be a PC mentality which litteraly pervades the US (I'm making that assumption here, but I bet you do live there :)).

      Problem is: men and women are different. For chistsakes, men have penises, women have breasts and vagina's! This automatically also entails (documented!) differences in brainstructure. Being pregnant for nine months, ditto.
      It has come to amaze me that the US PC culture has lead to the belief that men and women are the same (just look at the mess that university president got in). Especially since that is just not true. Not just not true, but demonstrably false! The differences in brain structure don't just cover the use of bits of anatomy, or only behaviour during pregnancy, but a much larger scala of emotional responses. This has been proven beyond a doubt, not just by brain scans (ask a neurologist for the [few] structures we know about), but also in countless behavioural studies. Men and women have (sometimes vastly) different attitudes, ways of thinking, ways of problem solving, ways of interacting. And the funny thing is that most people realise this instantly (hey, that's what all that wierd stuff during puberty taught us, and why a book like 'women from venus, men from mars' sells so well). What is so odd is that people thne don't draw the obvious conclusion, which is that (as a sweeping generalisation) men and women are more suited for different jobs (of course, with a huge amount of overlap and cases of exceptions proving the rule).

      Furthermore: my analysis absolutely doesn't support the grandparent in terms of productivity: the exact opposite: I even stated that more women in the workforce at google would actually increase the amount of usable products that it could offer! Which leads to...mo' money.

      My conclusion: men and women are different, deal with it. This isn't a case of "women offer something special that men dont": they do! And visa versa! It's a case of people having to realise (sooner or later) that men and women offer different things, that they complement each other, and thus that they are worth the exact same. It's not sexist (as you imply that it is I'm implying :P), it's just the way the world is.

      --
      -- Waht? Tehr's a preveiw buottn?
    8. Re:50% female is the goal by Tlosk · · Score: 1

      Interestingly enough the equal pay drive has hurt them the most in this area. Now ideally it is equal pay for equal work, but as you've pointed out, on average women don't provide an equal amount of work.

      Which means paying them the same is paying them more than what you would pay for a conmensurate amount of male labor.

      This was balanced before by paying women less. Of course now you have lots of women who are unmarried and childless and contribute just as much as any man would. So it would be problematic to discriminate pay based solely on gender.

      And with maternity leave laws and work place protections it makes it difficult to treat workers on a case by case basis (and one can argue that there are societal benefits to the creation of new workers, care of elderly parents, etc).

      It's such a morass that I think the biggest mistake we've made is thinking we can legislate by fiat one set of rules for everyone.

      I'd rather see workers and employers hash out work agreements themselves. People who do stupid stuff, like refuse to hire any women or pay them much less than what the work they contribute is worth will be at a disadvantage to employers to don't.

    9. Re:50% female is the goal by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Ugh, I just saw my mistake, and I generally despise the blanket equality crowd. But I guess my mistake advances argument, so all is not lost.

      While (ignoring my previous mistake) I agree that there are definate physiological (and hence psychological) differences between genders, I don't think that these differences matter much practically. I have not heard of any psychological, or cognitive feat that a female could do better than a male, or visa versa (ignoring, of course nursing and childbirth). Sure, each gender has differing potentiality (if that is a word) if different areas. (Males; upper body strength, logic, single task concentration: females; lower body strength, empathy, multitasking, etc...). When hireing people for a skilled and trained position, though, both genders will probably perform the task in the same general way,as they were taught to.

      This is one reason why I think there should be a single skill set in which EVERYONE is judged for a job, and judged only by this skill set. I'm all for taking race and gender off of applications, and letting the persons abilities speak for themselves. And if more women have a general propensity for the job, sobeit.

      On the other hands, the CULTURE of men and women are radically different (which is only a side effect of physiology), and I think it would be beneficial to product design to represent both cultures and the resultant differences in taste. I, as a guy, am more apt to like no-frills interfaces, which have a minimal of superfluous features, and most women I know would prefer only the features they need, placed in an aesthetic manner.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    10. Re:50% female is the goal by Omestes · · Score: 1

      And what would this disadvantage be, pre tell?

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    11. Re:50% female is the goal by Tlosk · · Score: 1

      The specific "damage" will naturally vary from industry to industry, in some there will be negligble damage. Any time you arbitrarily limit your employment pool by an employment nonspecific criteria you are reducing the pool of qualified and above applicants. On average, some of those excluded will have qualities not possessed by those remaining in the pool.

      If your business is sweeping floors, then arbitrary reductions in the available employment pool probably isn't going to hurt you much if any. But there are few modern jobs where that will be true.

    12. Re:50% female is the goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wow, improved hiring odds for females, huh?

      Given that I'm a guy that narrowly missed hiring once, and the fact I'm not exactly *using* 'the guys' that much...

      Are there any hiring advantages for Eunichs that know Unix?

    13. Re:50% female is the goal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > if they go all-male, who is going to provide the human-interaction insight?

      Gay men. Just like usual. Hello?

    14. Re:50% female is the goal by lampajoo · · Score: 1

      Filling your company with chicks so you and your geek friends can finally score, while understandable, is not a commendable move.

    15. Re:50% female is the goal by lampajoo · · Score: 1

      That's nice in theory, but there are plenty of arbitrary limits on the employment pool besides just a simple gender-based restrictions. People refer and hire their friends...people form clans. A company is not going to be hurt by not hiring women if hiring women would disrupt the internal power structure.

    16. Re:50% female is the goal by burdalane · · Score: 1

      You mean men don't sneak away for naptime out of sheer laziness? Or spend all day getting paid for reading Slashdot instead of doing work?

    17. Re:50% female is the goal by Omestes · · Score: 1

      I don't know, I think that there are definate disadvantages to a discriminatory work place, but your argument seems rather weak. In any hiring practice you must limit (sometimes arbitrary) the pool of available workers, especially in todays market where the amount of available workers outweigh the amount of available jobs. In doing this, all companies would be getting less effecient/competative/whatever, and this would continue as long as some form discrimination is in place.

      Is "I don't like the look of that guy" count as an arbitrary discrimination? It seems to. But I think that that logic is pretty common in hiring practices, probably more common than "she's a chick, don't hire her".

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  33. Hot girls in the audience?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone notice the 2 hotties right around the 8 minute mark? Since when are hot chicks in CS? I gotta transfer to that school!!

    1. Re:Hot girls in the audience?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not sure about the one on the left, but the one on the right graduated last year, is now working at Google, and was profiled recently in Seventeen magazine. There's still quite a handful of hot chicks in the department, though. ;)

  34. Re:the video is slashed someone post a bittorrent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Here's a summary of the most interesting part.

  35. Is there a way of watching this? by tom+taylor · · Score: 1

    Is there actually a way of watching this under Linux? mplayer refuses to stream either of the Quicktime/WMP URLs, and I can't download the files with wget because of they use rtsp/mms respectively.

  36. A quick search on KeyKOS makes one wonder: by NightFears · · Score: 1

    Does it have anything in common with GNU's microkernel efforts?

    Anyone cares to post a brief overview of KeyKOS, possibly in connection and/or comparison to Mach/HURD?

  37. Has anyone else noticed that... by omeomi · · Score: 2, Funny

    ...Google seems to be down a lot lately? Like right now, I can't seem to get to it...what's with that?

    1. Re:Has anyone else noticed that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unplug your coffee machine and plug your cable modem back in.

  38. MiMMS by Kristoffer+Lunden · · Score: 2, Informative
    Found directly in Ubuntus repositories, you probably have it in many others too:
    MiMMS, formerly called "mmsclient", is a simple client to download
    streaming audio and/or video media from the internet uscodeing the MMS
    protocol (i.e. from mms:// type URLs, generally found in asx files).
    Downloaded streams can then be replayed offline at your leisure,
    using any compatible media player of your choice.
    mimms mms://media-wm.cac.washington.edu/ifs/uw_cse05_goo gle_1300k.asf

    Of course, a torrent would be even better - for their bandwidths sake. :)
  39. check googisgod's profile -- all trolls for site by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    buddy, your site sucks. whore it somewhere else.

  40. Background by Pan+T.+Hose · · Score: 2, Interesting

    A quick search on KeyKOS makes one wonder: Does it have anything in common with GNU's microkernel efforts? Anyone cares to post a brief overview of KeyKOS, possibly in connection and/or comparison to Mach/HURD?

    Short answer: yes it does, and it is actually one of the main reasons why I look forward to use Debian GNU/Hurd in the future. Let me quote my old post from January with some background and interesting links to more informations about KeyKOS:

    Still, you can't block every hole in security. Sometimes you just have to hope, right?

    Yes, you can. No you don't. Software is just an applied form of discrete mathematics. "Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it," as Donald Knuth once said. It is possible to present a formal proof of correctness for any algorithm. It is nearly impossible and certainly impractical when you have a big mess of spaghetti code like with most of software that is utter crap, but it is possible nonetheless when you know what are you doing and design appropriately, with very clean, small and isolated parts of your system responsible for enforcing its security policies. Take a look at such operating systems as KeyKOS and EROS. E.g. read Verifying Operating System Security paper by J. S. Shapiro and S. Weber: "This paper presents a proof of correctness of the EROS operating system architecture with respect to confinement." Read some essays by Norman Hardy, especially those on Capability Theory. This is hardly a new idea, see GNOSIS: A Prototype Operating System for the 1990s paper by Bill Frantz, Norm Hardy, Jay Jonekait and Charlie Landau, written more than 25 years ago. The bottom line is: it is certainly possible to have a 100% secure system, but developers don't bother because users don't care.

    And here is a newer post of mine asking exactly your question about KeyKOS capabilities in connection to the recent development of The Hurd, in the First Program Executed on L4 Port of GNU/HURD discussion two months ago:

    When the first programs run, it is just a matter of time before there is a functional L4 port of Debian GNU/Hurd (or just Debian GNU?). I really like the design of the Hurd, but what I'd like to see the most are not the "POSIX capabilities" but the real capabilities as described in the 1975 paper by Jerome Saltzer and Michael Schroeder, The Protection of Information in Computer Systems. (For those who don't know what am I talking about, I recommend starting from the excellent essay What is a Capability, Anyway? by Jonathan Shapiro, and then reading the capability theory essays by Norman Hardy. As a sidenone I might add that I find it amusing that people who say that there are other advantages than only Digital Restrictions Management of using TCPA/Palladium-like platforms usually quote security fe

    --
    Sincerely,
    Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
    "Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
  41. this is very old by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this happened way back in october 2004 and was widely blogged shortly thereafter.

  42. Boring by BaatZ · · Score: 1

    :/
    I study physics, and even a college advanced vector algebra isn't as boring as this.
    Can't they didge the speaker & employ someone with passion ?
    Are all colleges in the USA as boring as this one (since it's the washington university, with quite some prestige...) ????

    1. Re:Boring by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a recruitment speech, hence they have a former graduate holding it. Someone who knows what the people in the room are doing can angle the speech so that it hits the audience better.

  43. Booooooooooring... by Dan+East · · Score: 2

    Considering that there isn't any magical alchemy going on behind the scenes, google is in fact pretty boring. The only thing interesting is the scale of the operation.

    Dan East

    (finally able to post for the first time in two weeks - wonder if anyone else had a problem)

    --
    Better known as 318230.
  44. But.. what is it? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    seriously, for the unwashed, what is KeyKOS and why are you interested?

    "KeyKOS ® is a persistent, pure capability operating system."

    Doesn't tell me (a non-CS major) anything useful about it at all.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    1. Re:But.. what is it? by ezzzD55J · · Score: 1
      "KeyKOS ® is a persistent, pure capability operating system." Doesn't tell me (a non-CS major) anything useful about it at all.

      Take a look at: http://www.eros-os.org/ which is a modern (re)implementation of many of KeyKOS's ideas. Fantastic ideas.

  45. MOD PARENT UP by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Very good question. And for the answer see this comment, posted above in this thread.

  46. hat making by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    instructions here (scroll down)

  47. doesn't do it justice by adpowers · · Score: 1

    I think you get more out of if it from watching the video. Not only are there graphs and pictures at some points (like pictures of Google over the years), but you get to hear all the little jokes Jeff Dean makes (he is a pretty funny guy). Also, near the end they show a neat behind-the-scenes interface where you can look at automatically formed clusters of information. It clusters words or ideas together, which is probably used by things like Google Sets and their search engine (try searching for [lotr], it knows you mean [lord of the rings] and includes that in the search as well.

    He talks a little about the future of search (trying to get meaning out of searches, so it kind find stuff you are looking for, even if doesn't use the exact word (sort of like what you can do now by using the ~ when you search)) and he even makes a pot joke!

    This was on UWTV (the actual station). I recorded it on our DVR for my family, but they don't really want to watch it :(

  48. Google innovates? It's news to me. by danila · · Score: 4, Interesting

    May be Google has done some nifty things with their file-system, but can't we forget about it already? Their search hasn't changed much http://www.google.com/">in the past six years. Of course, the fanboys will salivate over Google calculator and Google unit converter, but on the scale of Internet these "innovations" barely register.

    Some of the other search engines are comparable in quality to Google (Teoma, Vivisimo), and may be better, depending on how many points you take away from Google for spam-infested results, too many blogs, too many Wikipedia clones, too many commercial sites, etc. And some sites are so much further on the innovation scale (meet BrainBoost, an artifically intelligent Internet reference desk answering any questions asked in natural English, with amazing quality and accuracy in a very friendly and usable interface) that they put Google to shame.

    --
    Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
    1. Re:Google innovates? It's news to me. by GuyErnest · · Score: 1

      I think that some of the analysis he showed was rather interesting. The peaks of "eclipse" or "full moon" around these events, or the seasonal changes of "watermelon" queries, are an openning for automatic community knowledge.

      Does anyone know how we can get access to this type of information? He showed a web interface (using Mozilla) to query this kind of "knowledge". Is it opened for outside queries?

    2. Re:Google innovates? It's news to me. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Interesting, I did a comparison. Now, I happen to own a Via Rhine based NIC so I did a vague search on the string "Linux via-rhine" (without the quotes) on Google, Teoma and Vivisimo. The string doesn't imply anything except that I want my results to show something about Linux related to via-rhine (or vice versa).

      In the Teoma Results the first hit of 51,600 was a forum post where someone asked "Trying to install LMD 10 using a Via motherboard with onboard Rhine NIC configuration asks for additional parameters - anyone know these please?" It was about someone having problems with an onboard Rhine chip on Mandrake, very short, not much detail and not particularly interesting (nor would it have been helpful even if I was having problems with it).

      In the Vivisimo Results the first hit of 51,600 was to a mailing-list post where the topic was "VIA Rhine problem in 2.4". Someone was having an obscure problem with a D-Link dfe-530tx, probably not what I'm looking for. Ironically there was a link in that post to what turned out to be the first hit on Google, and the mailing list post was actually an answer from a company employee at Scyld Software, which brings us to Google..

      In the Google Results the first hit of 99,400 was to "Linux Drivers for PCI Ethernet Chips". The link was to a page at Scyld Software, a Linux company. It had information about several Linux kernel drivers (including Via Rhine/II) along with usage instructions, module settings, support options and diagnostic programs - not to mention a direct link to the driver source code. What I could learn from this hit was a lot, including the fact that I can use the via-rhine driver to both Rhine as well as Rhine II chips.

      What I found most interesting about all this was not the results (they speak for them self) but rather the number of hits. Theoma and Vivisimo had the exact same number of hits which leads me to believe that they share the same indexes but filter the results differently (Indeed, the second hit on Vivisimo was the same as the first one on Teoma). I admit, Vivisimo has a really cool interface, especially the "Clustered Results"-thing, but the quality on the hits arent nearly as good as those of Google so none of them are Google replacements, yet. Well, that's my conclusion based on this shallow test anyway.

      Oh, and thanks for the links btw - they're going into my collection.

  49. A spell-checker for ./ ? by rfunches · · Score: 1

    Did you mean: "University of Wahington English Department"

    And coming soon to Google:
    Google Video Transcript Beta
    For those too lazy to watch Internet video

  50. You moron by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Telling the truth is not bias. There's not two sides to every story. Sounds like you bought the fringe marketing hook line and sinker--you should think differenct because you're a unique special talented flower. Well surprise, you're not.

    When being different is more important than being right, honest, or truthful, you're either a 15 year boy or a borderline scizophrenic sociopath.

  51. More Video Links by aallan · · Score: 1

    I found this video back in February, isn't this a dupe? Anyway my blog post about it also has a link to good paper on the Google File System written up for the 19th ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, along with video of the talk the Google guys gave at the symposium.

    You might also want to have a look at my post on Eric Schmidt talking about Google to the Stanford Business School. The post also has a link to a video of Urs Hölzle talking to the University of Washington about clustering at Google.

    Both are worth watching...

    Al.
    --
    The Daily ACK - Eclectic posts by yet another hacker
  52. Please pay no attention by AvatarofVirgo · · Score: 0

    to the man behind the curtain.

  53. Overheard in a management meeting... by IdJit · · Score: 1

    "Hmmm...Let's see...Which little piss-ant company can we take over today?..."

    No, wait...that's Microsoft...Hold on! Nope. I'ts Google, alright...I think...no, maybe it is MS...Ummm...

  54. Googlemath? And I thought the Pentium floating... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    point bug was embarrasing. Maybe Google should stick to only supplying other sources' answers. Jeeessshhh!

    http://www.google.com/search?q=1%2F0&btnG=Google+S earch WTF?

  55. Mirror and a Torrent by Vulture-X · · Score: 1

    As pointed out by a previous post, there is a mirror available. However, if you really want, you can use this torrent instead. The video is actually pretty interesting, particularly if you are interested in search or distributed systems.

    --
    Evan Jones http://evanjones.ca/
  56. The Easy Solution by Nom+du+Keyboard · · Score: 1
    poses some of the most interesting challenges in computer science.

    Just throw some more hardware at it.

    --
    "It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
  57. EROS by Pseudonym · · Score: 1

    You should check out EROS, which is an open source OS based on KeyKOS (but updated a bit).

    --
    sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
  58. pageview ad revenue, eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  59. Jeff Dean needs to keep his day job by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From a public speaking point of view, his delivery sucks.

    Countless "umms" - very annoying.

    Picking / scratching his nose.

    Waving his hands around needlessly.

    Get back to the lab man.....leave speaking to other people!

  60. google yourself... by torrents · · Score: 1

    how long before we're able to google our own brains for information...

    --
    Get your torrents...
  61. Screw it. by Cap'n+Steve · · Score: 0

    Bah. They should just let us run SQL queries on their database. They can handle it.

  62. Google is a pain to deal with by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their arrogance and self-righteous attitude is disgusting. If you've ever had the unfortunate experience of having to deal with them for anything (unless you yourself are the CEO or CFO of a Fortune 100 or just a billionaire) you can expect:

    a) attitude from h*ll
    b) refusal to return phone calls
    c) no acknowldgement of anything
    d) desire to control control control everything
    e) cheapskates
    f) ignoring requests (clients alike!)
    g) bunch of pretty la di da's prancing around "look at us we're all so hip and rich and under 35 and good looking"
    h) no humility, humbleness. They think they know they are the best and that's the last word on anything.
    i) fookin' ugly pics of those two weirdo founders always touching each other.

    YUCK! I use http://jux2.com/ and love it. Even Ask Jeeves is better. They are nice to deal with and don't get all the stupid out of date "results" that you do with Google.