Slashdot Mirror


Google's Impact on the Internet

Kierkegaard writes "The Globe & Mail and Fortune Magazine both wrote a piece on Google, arguably one of the most important companies in the world, and its influence and impact on the Internet. In particular, they mention the effects of Google's recent new services, like Blogger and Maps, as well as their take on how Google threatens the Microsoft Corporation. "If Sergey and Larry stick to their corporate mantra -- Don't be evil -- and are able to stem degeneration into the typically corrupt corporate ethos, who knows, they may just succeed in assuming the fair and honourable dominion over the world's information they so naively set out to achieve eight years ago in their garage.""

37 of 351 comments (clear)

  1. Google important? by Threni · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If they weren't around I'd just be using Yahoo or whatever, and having less unused space in my various free web-based email accounts.

    1. Re:Google important? by thirteenVA · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That's a rather cynical view. How could you possibly try to downplay the impact of Google by attempting to paint them as yet another search engine and email provider.

      Without Google I'd have lost hours searching through wads of irrelevant and/or paid listings in yahoo or MSN.

      Without Google I'd have been lost when trying to convert teaspoons to tablespoons or quarts to liters.

      Without Google, we'd be lost in a sea of paid advertisements lurking as 'relevant articles'.

      Only recently have I found it more difficult to pull good results from google, but even so, their usefulness is unparalleled. Google maps is easily the best web-based mapping application. Gmail leaves other mail providers in the dust (and gives free POP access, which is rare) Google local is incredibly useful for finding nearby shops and restaurants.

      I can no longer imagine a world without Google, and can only laugh at your attempt to downplay their importance in todays society.

    2. Re:Google important? by thirteenVA · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It's amazing to think that 8 years ago some of the greatest minds in the world were saying "How will we organize and access the far reaches of the web". Two college students took it upon themselves to figure it out and deploy that solution to the world.

      Sergey and Brin take their job very serious. Organizing and delivering a whole world's information/thoughts/opinions is a HUGE responsibility, yet they've carried it and with dignity. I see little if any abuses of the power they hold. How many other companies could do what google does and resist the temptation to abuse their audience or subject them to slanted views/opinions or worse.

      Google's only agenda is to get you where you want to be.

    3. Re:Google important? by jeroenb · · Score: 5, Funny
      Sergey and Brin take their job very serious. Organizing and delivering a whole world's information/thoughts/opinions is a HUGE responsibility, yet they've carried it and with dignity.

      These two have done great things yes, but don't downplay the work of two other great minds, Larry and Page.

    4. Re:Google important? by centron · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, just like if Firefox weren't around you'd just use IE, and if computers weren't around you'd just use a pen and paper, right?

      --

      XeoMage

  2. Internet barons... by Gopal.V · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Google's always behind technology
    Yahoo's always behind safe money (see the Y! News vs G News)

    And Microsoft is behind all evil,
    Netscape survived as Firefox and
    Macromedia just went to Adobe ..

    That's a brief history of the web since Y2K :)

  3. Googlewhack by Malc · · Score: 4, Funny

    Thank you Google. Without you that madman Dave Gorman might have stopped after meeting people with the same name. But with your help he got to play Googlewhack and I got to listen to his stories and split my sides with laughter.

  4. What about the not-so-good things? by Enigma_Man · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm curious to hear from people that have bad experiences with Google, or wish they did something another way, or even any examples of "corporate evilness" from them.

    I'm not trying to be trollish, just curious if anybody has any perspective other than the very good experiences most of us have had with Google.

    -Jesse

    --
    Nothing says "unprofessional job" like wrinkles in your duct tape.
    1. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by Timesprout · · Score: 4, Funny

      Google ate my hamster.

      --
      Do not try to read the dupe, thats impossible. Instead, only try to realize the truth
      What truth?
      There is no dupe
    2. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by DelawareBoy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      How about Google assisting censorship in China?

      http://www.marketingvox.com/archives/2005/04/15/ ch ina_censorship_working_google_workers_happy/

      As an avid reader of Slashdot, I think we all can find a bit of evil in this..

    3. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by michaelhood · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Google's AdWords program is completely opaque in it's processes. I get my clicks reduced/"slowed"/paused on some keywords, and through the roof on others. Google flat out ignores requests for explanations. Google also turns a huge blind eye to fradulent clicks, which we estimate could be as high as 10-20% of all registered clicks. This is not limited to just myself. Both issues are well documented on the webmasterworld.com forums by dozens of other advertisers. Higher volume advertisers get no preferential treatment from what I can tell, except that we just run into problems *more* often, due to the volume.

    4. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by oneiros27 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You can either bring no service, or service in compliance with the rules and regulations of the locations that you are providing the service.

      Which one is more evil? Refusing to provide your service to a population that could otherwise benefit from it, even in its reduced capacity, or making it available, even if you might not be happy with the terms you're required to comply with?

      The correct answer -- neither. Neither one is inherently evil. The first one is petty and immature, and the second one can be construed as greedy without knowing all of the details.

      --
      Build it, and they will come^Hplain.
    5. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by eric_brissette · · Score: 3, Interesting

      As far as I knew, the whole Chinese censorship thing wasn't about money. My understanding (which may be wrong, correct me if I am) was that Google was attempting to pre-censor some news stories for the Chinese, so that China wouldn't block the site completely. It was a choice between leaving out some stories, or having China block the entire site. Maybe it was the wrong choice, but the reasons behind it didn't seem all that sinister.

    6. Re:What about the not-so-good things? by tompercival · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I prefix any email address I give so that it is particular to the company I am contacting - I'm hardly a breakaway revolutionary there. I wrote to Google to ask about future services using the alias google@mydomain.com. The vast majority of spam I now receive is to that alias. I wrote to them to ask them why and funnily enough never heard back from them.

      I know that's hardly the end of the world but it's depresing nonetheless.

  5. I'd love to be on the inside of this machine by Adult+film+producer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Unless you reject cookies from google outright, they can learn a lot about you. The colour of shirts you like to wear, what cpu manufacturer you prefer, what ideas you had for mother's day presents, everything concerning your sexuality, your political leanings (left, right, fascist, communist.)

    Give them a few years and their database of profiles will be awsome.. I just hope their not working in concert with any covert u.s. government institutions.

  6. Google = "The Internet" by pete19 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I tend to find that especially amongst "non-geeks", Google IS the internet. Could they have much more of an impact than that?

    --
    There is nothing more practical than a good abstract theory.
    1. Re:Google = "The Internet" by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I tend to find that especially amongst "non-geeks", IE is the interweb. Which is worse?

  7. Perhaps... by gandell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Consider this. Yahoo, MSN, and many others have begun scrambling to provide the same services that Google has right now. Toolbars, Desktop Search apps, and even increased space in your email accounts. Like it or not, Google has changed the face of the search industry. Will they keep their dominance? It depends on how the technology evolves. I've not seen any of the other internet based companies have the same impact. I'd say that makes Google pretty important.

    --
    Mercy was given to me by Christ...I must give the same to others.
    1. Re:Perhaps... by Threni · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > Like it or not, Google has changed the face of the search industry

      I'd not call that `changing the face of the search industry`. But I wasn't denying they've affected how some other companies, simply that it's not one of the most important companies in the world, which was the original, laughable claim to which I was responding.

  8. April 20, 2005 by michaelhood · · Score: 5, Funny
    Sterling, VA (REUTERS) April 20, 2005 -- The recent thrust of Google stories on the ever-popular Slashdot website have not been just a coincidence. Slashdot will be renamed to Googledot effective May 1, 2005. Slashdot editors seek to assure the readership that all of Slashdot's features will remain, including but not limited to 3+ Google stories per day, and an infinite amount of dupes.
  9. Garage? by MoonFacedAssassin · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...they may just succeed in assuming the fair and honourable dominion over the world's information they so naively set out to achieve eight years ago in their garage.

    Is it just me, or does it seem every computer "revolution" begins in a garage (*ahem* apple, etc)?

    *Note to self* Get a garage.

    --
    I am a meat popsicle.
  10. Google a threat? by gtoomey · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Google revenue: 3 Billion. Microsoft Revenue: 38 Billion

    Unless Google pulls a rabbit out of a hat (like a new operating system), I cant see this changing any time soon.

  11. They haven't been too evil by tech-hawger · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think they're doing a good job of "not being evil". People freaked out when Gmail first came out because of the whole we'll-scan-your-emails-to-show-relevant-ads thing. But people aren't complaining too much now with 2 gigs free space (and increasing everyday). Yahoo was all over the 1gig free e-mail but hasn't said much in regards to Google's 2gig offering. They have been getting new products to the market a lot faster than their competitors. It's now mostly Yahoo and Google with Microsoft somewhat lagging behind in the innovation and speed department.

  12. Stay good, Google! Stay good! by FhnuZoag · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yeah. So they think that goodness will triumph. Fat chance. The Dark Side always wins. Power corrupts. No matter what pledges are made, there is nothing concrete that will keep google from becoming 'evil'. After all, everyone's perception of evil changes, and who knows what would happen if Google starts thinking for people, deciding for its customers what it's best interests are? The online community is getting too reliant on google. We need competition. We need alternatives. If one group be allowed to dominate, it needs to be one with openness and non-profitness written into its being. And google does not have that.

  13. Their impact on the internets? by hsmith · · Score: 3, Funny

    They have converted slashdot into their press release center, you always know what is going on with google!

  14. Google is way overestimated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I know I will be modded down for this but still need to say it.

    Google has had very little real impact on the "Internet". For those of us who used it before Google, before the web, P2P, bittorrent, and the hordes of stupid people who populate it, the internet is about the same.

    I think that if Google has had any effect it is largely negative. Google Groups has done more harm then good, Usenet used to be a place you could go for real information. Now it is nothing but complete crap.

    As for searching, Altavista was acceptable before google was on the scenes. Google really offers nothing new. They simple consolidate what can be found elsewhere by any savvy user.

    Don't get me wrong. I think they are a great company and I use their products every day but I also think they are just another internet company and eventually they will be replaced. Companies like these (Google, Yahoo, Ask Jeeves) tend to have a boom followed by a period of dwindling interest as it finds its niche. Google is just another niche company that happens to be in the boom stage at the moment.

    1. Re:Google is way overestimated. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I'm not quite following how Google had a negative impact on USENET. I think USENET's decline in usage (and quality for that matter) is tied directly to the fact that they really didn't 'market' themselves as a useful service for information dissemination to the masses
      I too used to go on USENET quite a bit to find out interesting tech information, but I stopped in the late ninties once surfing the web made getting that information a whole lot easier (and cleaner for tha tmatter). It's not a good thing when you can load up just about any unmoderated group and the first 500 threads are adverts for horse porn.
      Usenet didn't keep with the times, therefore USENET is marginalized. Then again, you can still find great tech information (Novell is a great example here) on the moderated forums.

  15. Re:Isn't is kinda scary? by 0x461FAB0BD7D2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    MSN is used by many people who won't change their home pages in IE. Yahoo is used by many others, evidenced by its high level of registered users, who are more familiar with that site.

    Google may be a verb, but it doesn't control the WWW or what can and cannot be found on it.

    If Google tried to censor or in any way hamper what could and could not be found on the web, there will be others who take over, and Google knows this. They'd lose ad revenue, consequently, and that's the end of them. That is why they have extended support to the open-source community, and stuck to their "Do no evil" policy.

    It's in their best personal, moral and business interest.

  16. Re:Isn't is kinda scary? by Sanity · · Score: 3, Interesting
    A p2p type network would be sloooooow
    Not necessarily, the paper linked in my blog entry demonstrates that this is possible in logarithmic time. With a UDP-based protocol it could be very fast indeed.
    give you different results each time you logged on
    Why?
  17. They All Become Evil, Eventually... by ausoleil · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Think of the progression in the trilogy, "Lord of the Rings" -- the main character, Frodo Baggins, starts as an ingenue, takes on the task, and at the end, once he realizes the true power of the Ring, decides that he will keep it for himself. Of course, there is a twist of fate and a happy ending, but one thing was for certain: Frodo was seduced by the power the Ring offered.

    The same thing will likely happen to Google, though the term 'evil' may a bit overused. Google is a public company now, and like all public companies, they have a responsibility to maximize shareholder value. If the directors of the company will not do this, the board has a responsibility to put in place people who will.

    That said, Google will become more like Microsoft and more like Adobe over time. They will try to protect their market share, they will try to prevent the entry of others into their market space that they perceive as a threat. And, given the world's propensity to pull for the "little guy" Google will in turn be perceived (rightly or wrongly) as a bully, a bad guy and therefore -- evil.

    This is a natural progression for successful startups. Microsoft did not begin as a huge monolith, it was a small company that one could send an e-mail to the founders and usually get a reply. It was also a decent company from a service standpoint. They grew, their market grew and the service got a lot less personal and the stakes got a whole lot bigger. Thirty years later, they are thought of as a James Bond villain.

    1. Re:They All Become Evil, Eventually... by Ender_Stonebender · · Score: 5, Interesting
      The same thing will likely happen to Google, though the term 'evil' may a bit overused. Google is a public company now, and like all public companies, they have a responsibility to maximize shareholder value. If the directors of the company will not do this, the board has a responsibility to put in place people who will.

      The philosophy behind "maximize shareholder value" is one that I have never been able to understand. A corporation will certainly want its stock to maintain some value - otherwise they will not be able get new capital through issuing new stock - but in the end it's not the stockholders that keep the company in business. It's the customers who keep the company in business. (And in the case of Google, the "customers" I'm referring to aren't the people giving Google money, they're the people using Google to search - although in Google's case some concessions must be made to advertisers.) A company that has customers who are happy with its products will probably maintain or increase the value of its stock (not to mention customer loyalty and word-of-mouth's affect on profit margins). A company that is increasing the value of its stock artificially (by stock buy-backs, for example), is probably not a company that is keeping its customers happy.

      I'm not trying to say companies that are trying to maximize shareholder value are evil. I'm trying to say that I think the belief that maximizing shareholder value is a good business practice is misguided, as it's something that will happen naturally if the company is being run properly.

      I know I'm probably talking out my ass and will be flamed for it, but that's the way I feel.

      --Ender
      --
      Loose things are easy to lose. You're getting your hair cut. They're going there to see their aunt.
  18. Wow by mattmentecky · · Score: 3, Insightful

    arguably one of the most important companies in the world

    I guess this is where the arguably comes in....Google is great and all but...one of the most important companies? In the grand grand scheme of things I would say that it is barely even relevant. Sit back and think about any company that is researching an AIDS cure/vaccine, cancer treatment, any kind of any disorder - Alzheimer's, parkinson's, multiple sclerosis...and depending on how you cut 'company' I would hazzard a bet to say that any non-profit company is more important/relevant than Google...

    Keep perspective people, at least quantify your statement with "most important tech companies" and then you have a more sane argument. Google is just a good company.

  19. Innovation vs Popularization by Locarius · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What it comes down to me is the fact that Google seems to actually care about pushing new ideas and new technologies. Microsoft has always been about giving the user as little as possible until someone else innovates, and then sinking cash into bringing it to the popular market.

    Microsoft's impact on the Internet exists because most people are browsing from a Microsoft platform. If Google can introduce a platform to browse to all their services easily (Google branded Knoppix, perhaps) they might just remove the element of: "I'll use Microsoft Internet services because it must work smoothly with my OS".

  20. Google's creating a rich container wih Firefox by esconsult1 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    It seems clear to me that Google has Seen the Light (tm) with the successfull Ajax implementations of Maps and Gmail. This means that an enhanced version of Firefox -- all pointed to by the new hires and empolyee requirements -- is in the works.

    An enhanced version of Firefox freely downloadable from Google for all operating systems would be their own platform which, besides being able to view standard web pages, would enable then to distribute richer applications in a brand (Firefox) that has mindshare and user buy in.

    Think! Mac applications are cool because of the contained environment that is OS X (except Apple did not create enough of their own native applications). Microsoft is successfull with their applications because they built a container that is at least perfect for them -- Windows. The same will apply to Google with what I am convinced will be the enhanced browser environment based on Firefox.

    Why is Linux not gaining on the desktop? Because there is no "perfect Linux desktop container". The properties of such a container is that it should be standardized, easy to accept new client programs, have easy to use services and a well known API that is well documented and defined so that programmers can easily write to it.

    Instead we have a bunch of fragmented containers (KDE, Gnome, lots of lesser known desktop environments) that are incomplete and immature. Heck, its a pain the ass sometimes to get simple brain-dead stuff such as printing and mounting a drive working. So you have projects like OpenOffice having to write their own container!!! And Miguel (bless his heart) making a version of Microsoft's .NET container (Mono) for Linux that is still incomplete and sits with an incomplete container -- Gnome, which is sitting on top of an incomplete desktop container -- Linux.

    I know this is a rant, but my shop recently switched back to Windows from Linux desktops (about 40 people), why? Because the new CEO (and me too), were sick and tired of people trying to get things to work together properly. We were sick of not having an Exchange replacement (don't get me started on the open source once now "available"). And new hires and our clients were just plain used to using the dominant containers out there (windows/mac).

    So Google is moving in the direction of best of all worlds. They are creating their own perfect container for their applications, that can run on imperfect operating systems. Genius! I don't even have to wish them luck, because its a great idea which has to work -- unless they get Evil.

  21. Google Beta = "The Internet" by lbmouse · · Score: 5, Funny

    Google IS the internet

    To my 9 yo son, the name of the company is "Google Beta".

  22. ABSOLUTELY they are important by gosand · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If they weren't around I'd just be using Yahoo or whatever, and having less unused space in my various free web-based email accounts.

    If Google wasn't around, I would be using

    Yahoo or whatever for my search engine.

    I'd probably still be using Mapquest for maps (and cursing it).

    I don't know if I'd be able to search newsgroups the way I do. Would DejaNews still be around?

    I guess I'd have to use local.yahoo.com instead of local.google.com to find things in my area.

    Image searching - well, I'd be out of luck.

    I'd just have to figure out how to do some conversions (like celcius to fahrenheit)

    And I don't even use all of Google's features. They are important, because they changed the game. They innovated, in a very simple way (to the end user). Google maps is awesome, but up until Google did it, Mapquest was "good enough". That is why they are important, because they seem to do the things they do VERY well. It would be scary to companies if Google decided to enter their area of expertise.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  23. I love the Forbes article by dusanv · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It has combined software innovation with a brand-new Internet business model--and it wounds Gates' pride that he didn't get there first

    Seriously, what did MS do first? The association 'MS = cool new technology' makes not sense to me. They almost missed the Internet by their own admission. I think BillG isn't pissed that didn't come up with a cool search engine but because he can't kill Google like he did with numerous others.