Slashdot Mirror


Rob Pike's Excellent Adventure

Frisky070802 writes "The Newark Star-Ledger has an article about Rob Pike's move from Bell Labs to Google. The article has some interesting points, such as how Pike took a "huge pay cut" to go there just to work on cool things. And in a nostalgia trip for those others of us who've walked the halls of Bell Labs, the article compares earlier days at Bell Labs to the heady days at Google (Claude Shannon on a unicycle, and the famous Penn & Teller trick on Arno Penzias, then the head of Bell Labs research). Most of all are the differences in real-world impact: 'But products trickled slowly, if ever, from [Bell Labs]. They blast from Google at hyperspeed.'" (Painless demographic-only jump-through screen to read it.)

181 comments

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

    How does the guy interact with other workers if he only has a single light to communicate with?

    1. Re:Captain Pike! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was Christopher Pike.

    2. Re:Captain Pike! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nope. Christopher Pike is a type of fish. I'm sure of it.

    3. Re:Captain Pike! by nzlemming · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      So I've finally seen something on /. that made me go "ewww"

      I mean, really, "tapioca"?

      Eeeewwwwww!

      --
      A waist is a terrible thing to mind
    4. Re:Captain Pike! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Morse code?

    5. Re:Captain Pike! by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      Kif: One beep for "Yes," two beeps for "No."

      [Fry beeps once.]

      Zapp: "Yes," so noted. Do you plead guilty?

      [Fry beeps twice.]

      Zapp: Double "Yes." Guilty! I will now carry out the punishment. Kif, my gun.

  2. Academic research making a difference by Ithika · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I wonder when the next big thing in computer science is going to come along. (Random musings...)

    1. Re:Academic research making a difference by toddbu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Hmm, are you suggesting that the next big advance is going to come from academia? Or are you suggesting that it's the younger generation that will give us the next big push? You shouldn't necessarily tie the two together. There are a lot of really bright young kids coming out of our colleges these days, but I'm not sure how much the schools themselves are doing to advance their education. Ever look at a current version of a computer science text? Not much that's interesting there, other than the $200+ price tag. I'd like to think that in many situations these students are doing well in spite of the lack of support that they're getting from their educational institutions.

      --
      If you don't want crime to pay, let the government run it.
    2. Re:Academic research making a difference by JPriest · · Score: 1

      Very well said.

      --
      Saying Java is nice because it works on all OS's is like saying that anal sex is nice because it works on all genders.
    3. Re:Academic research making a difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you think most basic knowledge comes from, if not academia? Only recently has there been a trend toward going from basic to commercialization within these institutions. Academia has historically provided the foundation for what you may call "big advances" (e.g., pharmaceuticals...).

      The world of big advances is far more than Computer Science perhaps our personal experiences.

    4. Re:Academic research making a difference by thogard · · Score: 1

      I don't think I've seen anything new in computer science in about 20 years and that was only from older books. About all that has changed is the programs are slightly better but I rarely see a problem that can just now be solved by computers that couldn't be solved 20 years ago.

    5. Re:Academic research making a difference by xtracto · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. Sadly, we are focusing in how can we do the things we have been doing "better" and not how to do "new" things.

      Maybe only medical reserach is trying to get new medications for new diseases (e.g cancer, alzheimer, etc), alhtough the mainstream of research is focused on 'better' cures for the currently 'curable' diseases...

      I mean, that is not completely bad but, we have been focusing in the 'comercial' and proffitable point of view of things... and that is sad because no body will want to fund new and outstanding research.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    6. Re:Academic research making a difference by baadger · · Score: 1

      At a high programming level all computing software advances rely on the solving of problems found in mathematics rather than that of typical electronics. Math has certainly advanced in the last 20 years.

      Right now i'm sat here trying to make sense of a paper published in just 2004 so I can apply mathematical transformations similar to what it describes into a program i'm writing.

      I'm not bad at math but I'm sat here staring at the babble before me (and Slashdot - another source of babble) and can't help thinking the next big leap in computing will be due to a similar leap in the quality of communication between two peoples brains.

    7. Re:Academic research making a difference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're ignorant. Maybe you should try looking around. Or, you could just choose to remain ignorant. Regardless, academicians have not exactly been sitting on their hands for the past twenty years. There's a plentitude of advances out there if you choose to look.

  3. For anyone else wondering... by still_sick · · Score: 4, Informative
    --
    ...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
    1. Re:For anyone else wondering... by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny
      [..] in order to create a coherent video.

      Darn! Bell Labs invented a method of producing coherent light, but the secret of producing coherent videos hasn't escaped to the outside world yet.

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    2. Re:For anyone else wondering... by markwalling · · Score: 1
      --
      ...For the beast had been reborn with its strength renewed, and the followers of Mammon cowered in horror.
    3. Re:For anyone else wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have much to learn about Karma-Whoring, Junior.

    4. Re:For anyone else wondering... by Ratbert42 · · Score: 1

      Sounded pretty lame. Not to thread-hijack, but I've heard of better "corporate" Penn & Teller work. Like the time they came to I think a Pixar meeting and Penn chugged a bottle of Listerine.

  4. "trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Perhaps, but then again, weren't they responsible for a few minor things such as ... the Transistor? The Laser? Unix? Arguably 3 of the most important inventions of the past 100 years?

    1. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by JohnTheFisherman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah...I've seen the soaring stock price of Google (market cap beats AOL/TW now, yeah, uh...wow) and I'm wondering when it's going to collapse. They provide some nice free things for the web, but their advertising revenue can't come close to justifying their $80B value.

      What do they do that makes money? Believe me, I know there's more to life than money, but that's pretty much the main factor in the stock valuation.

    2. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you denying the earth-shattering world-changing import of, um, a somewhat-improved search engine!! Blasphemy!! Tie him to a stake!

    3. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Danger+Stevens · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Their Adsense program has pushed their revenue through the roof. They make several hundred million dollars a year from their advertising sector.

      It's not really the revenue that makes them worth so much though, it's their profit margins. The way they publish high quality software has made them into a company that only needs a fraction of what it earns. This means huge potential for growth.

      I'd say the current ruler of the internet with an outrageous income could easily be worth $80B.

      --
      World Changing - News for Humans, Stuff about our planet
    4. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by ph4s3 · · Score: 1

      Their current stock price is justified by the acceleration in revenue growth. Once (if) it slows down to a linear rate, their valuation will come back down as well. The common wisdom is that whatever you pay for it now, the up-side exposure is worth the risk.

      Then there's always the sentimental buyer. I bought 5 shares (@221, yeah!) because I've wanted a piece of them since I started using the page back in what? '97? '98?, and saw how relevant the results were; "I'm feeling lucky," ruled. My first thought was "holy shit, this is the way it is SUPPOSED to be," followed by, "these guys are going to change the world." And they did. And still are. I can only dream about working at a place as professionally and personally rewarding as Google. I'll settle for owning a little piece of the magic.

    5. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Seraphim1982 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Were those things really invented by Bell Labs? I know Unix was devolped there, but I thought the transistor and laser were invented elsewhere.

      AFAIK:
      The transistor was invented by Julius Lilienfeld in the 1920's.
      The first (microwave) laser was built at Columbia University.
      The first optical laser was built at Hughes Research Laboratories.

    6. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Screaming+Lunatic · · Score: 3, Informative
      Yeah...I've seen the soaring stock price of Google (market cap beats AOL/TW now, yeah, uh...wow) and I'm wondering when it's going to collapse. They provide some nice free things for the web, but their advertising revenue can't come close to justifying their $80B value.

      The stock market is not about revenue. It is about expected revenue. Currently Google's P/E ratio is at about 115. However, their one-year Forward P/E ratio is about 45. Which isn't that bad for a company that just had an IPO.

      Plus, they also have quarterly revenue growth of about 95% and quarterly earnings growth of 475%.

      AOL/TW has never done that. AOL/TW will never do that.

      What do they do that makes money?

      I don't know. But they have revenue of $3.79B and a gross profit of $1.73B for the last 12 months.

      http://finance.yahoo.com/q/ks?s=GOOG

    7. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by nomadic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Google will never, ever come anywhere close to the importance of Bell Labs. Ever.

      And I can't think of a single real innovation that came from Google. What, a really effective way of indexing web pages? That's not innovation.

    8. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      What do they do that makes money?
      Provide search and data mining services to the government, which far exceed the products available to the public.
    9. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lilienfeld may have come up with the idea of a transistor, but I don't think there's any evidence he ever made one.

      I guess it depends on what "invented" means. Did Da Vinci invent the airplane? He came up with the idea, but then, probably some ancient egyptian in 3000 BC had the idea too, from watching birds. It wasn't for hundreds of years after Da Vinci until anyone made it work.

    10. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by lupin_sansei · · Score: 1

      No innovations?

      What about Page Rank? That was a pretty significant innovation in search engine technology. Can you remember how bad Yahoo and Altavista's results where in 1998?

      Google groups basically archiving all of usenet back to 1982 or something.

      Gmail basically started the whole AJAX trend recently, plus pushed all the other email providers to boost their puny 1-5MB free accounts upto the GB range.

      Google maps caused a stir with such rich web apps too.

      I'd say there's some decent innovations coming from Google.

    11. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by magefile · · Score: 1

      Indexing based on a mutual ranking system isn't innovative? Caching pretty much the entire web isn't innovative? Sure, it's not nearly as amazing as what Bell Labs used to do, but it is innovative. And BL (now Lucent) is no longer in its heyday.

    12. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 2, Informative
      Google groups basically archiving all of usenet back to 1982 or something.
      Google groups is now hosting an evolving archive that started as DejaNews, plus Henry Spencer's tape collection from the 1980s, plus other independent archives and some gap-filling.

      While those of us in the Usenet community widely applaud Google for their adopting and continued hosting of the archives, it wasn't their idea to start with. Permanent (nonsearchable) archives started with Henry's tapes, over 25 years ago. DejaNews made it searchable. Google figured out how to make enough money doing it to justify having done so and the continuing operations.

      Google's doing a lot of good in the world, and making a lot of money off doing it. But there's no reason to give them credit for everything good that's out there. Doing that tends to slight historical contributions and effort of others.

      But good on Google for all sorts of other things they have done!

    13. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I've seen the soaring stock price of Google

      Excellent!
      and I'm wondering when it's going to collapse

      Bogus!

      You killed Google, you Wall Street dickweeds!

      Well, it is Rob Pike's excellent adventure, isn't it?
    14. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by lupin_sansei · · Score: 1

      Dejas only went back to 1995 though didn't they? Google's innovation was to extend the archive back to 1982. Granted Henry Spencer's tapes were used, but no one else has put them online complete back to 1982 as far as I know.

    15. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by zippthorne · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's got a P/E of 115. that's almost 10x what most investment resourses will tell you is a reasonable level. Think of it this way: if all those earnings were profit and they issued that to shareholders as dividends, you'd make less than 1% on your money. You would do better in a bank account. Its price is rising faster than that can only mean one thing: it's going to burst.. it has to.. unless they grow a lot. and quickly.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    16. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by lupin_sansei · · Score: 1

      I forgot Google's other major innovation. Cutting the homepage back to basics and making search the centre of what they offered, rather than pushing search off to the side like Yahoo. MSN and the rest were doing back in 1998.

      Google basically reversed the trend to flood the search portals with Flash ads, and X-10 popup windows like Yahoo were doing.

    17. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by larry+bagina · · Score: 4, Informative
      Lilenfeld had a schematic and a patent, but he didn't have a working prototype (he was ahead of his time and the technology prevented it).

      Bell Labs actually built a working one. Although it turned out to have a lot of uses outside telephony, Bell Labs provided the need for it and the R/D funding.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    18. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More isn't innovation. New is innovation.

    19. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Dejas only went back to 1995 though didn't they? Google's innovation was to extend the archive back to 1982. Granted Henry Spencer's tapes were used, but no one else has put them online complete back to 1982 as far as I know.
      Basically, Google helped right at the end of a roughly decade-long process to get the tapes available online...

      See for example David Wiseman's history of the recovery or the Salon.com overview article.

      In summary, Google only really started encouraging the tape restore project about six months before groups.google.com kicked off. The idea of restoring Henry's tapes had been widely thought of in the 1990s, and Wiseman had picked them up to start the project, but it took some years to accomplish, along with help from various people and some equipment from Brewster Kahle.

      And I'm leaving out a bunch of stuff. I won't try and credit everyone involved in the process here, but it was lots of people. Good on all of them.

    20. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Deja had the tapes ... for many years they promised to post them, but never did.

      And please stop using the word "innovation" like that, it makes you look like tard.

    21. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      > it's going to burst.. it has to.. unless they grow
      > a lot. and quickly.

      And the question is, grow how ? take over which market ?

    22. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Momoru · · Score: 1

      I agree they are overvalued, but to be devils advocate, its speculated they may start taking over MS's consumer application market. Offering a light OS with free ad sponsored word processors etc..

    23. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by rtv · · Score: 1

      Bell is a great lab, but credit where it's due: the laser was demonstrated by Theodore Maiman at Hughes Aircraft..

    24. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by lav-chan · · Score: 1

      It wasn't Bell Labs' job to produce products, was it? They only developed the ideas, i thought, and the ones that were most useful to AT&T were made into actual products by Western Electric. Right?

    25. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by SamBeckett · · Score: 1

      The stock market is not about revenue. It is about expected revenue.

      And the (theoretical) stock price is the present value of dividends on said stock into perpetuity. So, just knowing the growth rate of revenues doesn't really tell us a whole lot unless we know how much of that they return as dividends to the stock holder. This is why it was baffling that, in years past, Microsoft's stock was priced so high--they used to not pay dividends, thereby making their theoretical stock price $0.

    26. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by xtracto · · Score: 1

      You just have to wait. All the inventions from Bell labs and other companies on the previous years have been "technology" inventions by "technology" research companies.

      Google is an "information" company, you have heard it somewhere else, we are in the "information" age... the one who controls the information controls power, google is making it easy to "control" (i.e. it it not enough to have it, if you can not really use/handle it).

      So, in these years, Google's technology will come with something really outstanding.

      As an example, I would like to dream a bit. Imagine (just imagine) that all the knowledge to make teletransportation is already available, but by different people in different places. If someone at Google would like to start a "teleportation" project, they have ALL (or most of the) available information, they have the TOOLS to access that [and only the] relevant information and as the classification technologies (sorting, filtering, pattern recognition) improve, they will have more power.

      The thing is, nowadays we [human kind] have gatered so much knowledge[information] but, it is quite difficult to use it (as in, it is not easy for 1 person to make an outstanding invention by himself), so it is better to be able to access all that information in a coherent way.

      That is what Google is promising, a way to access all that information in a good way.

      So, no, Google indeed hasn't done any of those great physical inventions Bell has done, but they are doing something BIGGER (from my POV). They are not making a new technology, they are making tools so we [human kind] can create new technology.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    27. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ummm, those are business innovations, not technology innovations. Useful for income, yes, but not really life altering. The tranistor was truly life altering. The laser was less so, but still made quite a change in technology across a broad spectrum, not just telecom.

      And yes, I know that Gnu is Not Unix, and neither is Linux, but really, they both are implementations of the basic concepts and APIs. So without Unix, there would be no GNU, Linux, or Hurd.

      Oh yeah, one more thing. Stallman can stuff it....

      (Oh it feels so good to write that!)

    28. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by geeber · · Score: 1

      Bell Labs was responsible for an enormous number of breakthroughs. The problem is that AT&T and Lucent were never very good at making money off them.

    29. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Infoseek was pretty decent before google came along.

    30. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by CodeArtisan · · Score: 1

      No innovations?

      The Gmail implementation of POP3 is *the* most innovative I have ever seen. It's like having a shuffle feature on your inbox - just never know which 2 month old messages will make an appearance today.

    31. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by JohnTheFisherman · · Score: 1

      I should have probably clarified above I understood the simple P/E ratio stuff. This is the point I was driving at...so they take over all online ad revenues. Great. Their P/E goes down a bit....

      Their valuation obviously means that investors expect TONS more from them than just taking over online advertising. I see lots of free stuff that they offer, but nothing that justifies the price.

    32. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once (if) it slows down to a linear rate, their valuation will come back down as well.

      That's probably true. But for the sake of argument:

      Anybody who is assuming that valuation will fall when revenue growth goes non-exponential is gambling, not investing on fundamentals.

      Fundamental-based valuation is a function of expected earnings and dividends, not on revenue growth rates. If one expects a company with Google's revenues to grow those revenues at an exponential rate over the long term, one is living in some kind of alternate reality.

      The problem here is that nobody knows what Google's expected 'steady-state' revenue/earnings picture will look like. As a result, investors are gambling that their future earnings will justify the current price. The trick is not to be the one left holding the bag when it all goes pear-shaped.

      Not that there's anything wrong with a little speculation, of course -- especially given the Las Vegas approach that passes for 'investing' these days. But let's call it what it is.

    33. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a shame that Google is stripping information from the original format listing. The PATH line is valuable for mapping Usenet way back when. The less said about the munging the Beta interface likes to do, the better.

    34. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by robertjw · · Score: 1

      Google's innovation was to extend the archive back to 1982

      Aside from all of the other posts that question if this was 'innovation', I still can't get too excited about it. How often is a post from 1982 relevant today. When I search Google Groups I filter out anything older than 2 or 3 years. I appreciate the old archives from a historical perspective, but from a practical standpoint I really don't care.

    35. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by mcguyver · · Score: 1

      Seeing as though we're talking in expectations, 50% of G's revenue comes from AdWords. Y! has their contextual ad engine in public beta. MSN is working on their own. G is where they are today because of the low supply of clicks and contextual ads. That's about to change.

      In this thread we're comparing Bell Labs to Google - G Maps is no transitor, and AdSense is no Laser. Does anyone else think this whole thing is strage?

    36. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by crgrace · · Score: 1

      The Laser?

      The laser was first demonstrated at Hughes Research Labs. www.hrl.com

    37. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 1
      It's a shame that Google is stripping information from the original format listing. The PATH line is valuable for mapping Usenet way back when.
      I believe that the contents of those tapes are still available to researchers or the curious if you ask nicely.
      The less said about the munging the Beta interface likes to do, the better.
      I don't know anyone who likes it...
    38. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by kingdon · · Score: 1

      P/E of 115 is based on earnings for the last 12 months. While the exact time period isn't such a big deal for a stable company, for one growing as fast as google, there's a big difference between whether you take the last 12, or the last 3, or what. By comparison, the P/E based on projected earnings is 44.41 (as reported on yahoo). Of course the fishy part about this one is that word "projected", but on the whole it is probably a fairer number than the 115.

      By comparison, Microsoft, IBM, and HP are in the range of 13-25.

      You also have to consider the growth rate (see PEG or Price to Earnings to Growth ratio).

      Conclusion: Google may be a bit pricey as a stock, but on the whole its crazy stock price rise has been driven by crazy earnings growth. Barring some kind of accounting scandal, this makes it a rather different situation than a dot-com-bubble rise in stock price.

    39. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by cakoose · · Score: 1
      Google's innovation was to extend the archive back to 1982.

      Hmm...adding additional data to an existing archive. I guess that's just about as good as creating Unix, give or take.

    40. Re:"trickled slowly from Bell Labs"? by btarval · · Score: 1
      Well, personally I think you do a great deal of disservice to the actual inventor of the transistor. For example, his name is spelled "Lilienfeld".

      Secondly, do you have a source for these claims of yours? They sound like Bell Labs propaganda. Beyond Wikipedia please (which has gotten this information significantly wrong in the past). I've seen it claimed that Lilienfeld used to demonstrate his tubeless radio. I've also seen it claimed that he actually worked with the materials. One has to question your claim that it was all theoretical, since the Patent Office has required that patents only be granted for actual working devices.

      Thirdly, the point still stands that it was Lilienfeld who invented the transistor, not Bell Labs. Sadly, Bell Labs is still trying to claim this invention to this day; though I've read that they had to concede their invention claims to Lilienfeld's prior art.

      Personally, I think it's shameful that, on the 50th anniversary of Bell Labs' invention, they were STILL taking complete credit for the invention of the transistor at the actual ceremony.

      --
      The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Peter Drucker.
  5. New Google product coming? by AndroidCat · · Score: 5, Funny

    VOIP GooglePhone? They could combine it with their search engine and social networking. I can't wait to try that I'm Feeling Lucky button on my dialing screen, woohoo!

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    1. Re:New Google product coming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm looking forward to the Apple iPhone, with one button and a caption that says "Life's Random" myself. Imagine the possibilities with that, might make for some cool commercials - Apples Switch Ads meets Dating Service Success Stories.

      (cue music)

      I was sitting around one night, couldn't get a date. Figures. Women always overlook guys like me. Thats when I seen the ad for Apples new iPhone service. I admit, I was a little skeptical at first. I was never much of an early adopter. Heck, I still listen to vinyl. Haha. I never would have guessed that one little button could change a persons life so quickly. Her name is Lydia. And, I never would have found her with a second rate service, like Vonage or Skype. And, thanks to Apple, we are getting married this summer. In Hawaaii.

      -Steve, Denver

    2. Re:New Google product coming? by Omnieiunium · · Score: 4, Funny

      And in the middle of the phone call, in a smaller voice, you will hear ads about what you are talking about.

    3. Re:New Google product coming? by corsec67 · · Score: 1

      No, that would be the Google(tm) Cell Phone, with free service, but you get ads about what you are talking about.

      Heh, if you were talking about going somewhere to eat, you would hear a voice suggesting a place to go.

      I am joking now, but it is not outside the posbility for google.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    4. Re:New Google product coming? by jcuervo · · Score: 5, Funny
      Heh, that'd be some interesting phonesex.
      Male: I'm taking off my pants.
      Google: Mens' pants. Sale on Docker's. www.pants.com
      Female: Ooooh, I'm touching myself.
      Google: UNIX manpages - touch(1)
      Male: I bring out the goats.
      Google: Everything you ever wanted to know about herpes.
      Still better than Clippy.

      I see you're having sex. Would you like me to:
      ( ) Videotape it
      ( ) Watch
      ( ) Hold the bucket of cheez-whiz
      --
      Assume I was drunk when I posted this.
    5. Re:New Google product coming? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might yet happen. BT trialled advertising-supported free calls from public phones a while back (AdCall).

    6. Re:New Google product coming? by coopex · · Score: 1

      Don't you mean:

      BritneySpears14: I slip out of my pants, just for you, bloodninja.
      Google: Womens' pants. Sale at jjill.com.
      bloodninja: Oh yeah, aight. Aight, I put on my robe and wizard hat.

      --
      The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
  6. Love Rob Pike by Dancin_Santa · · Score: 4, Funny

    With him over at Google, it will be pretty cool to see the Google system ported onto Plan9.

  7. products? where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "...products blast from google..."

    uh, where? i can't think of one tangible product google has ever produced...

    bell labs on the other hand... oh lets see... how about... THE TRANSISTOR

  8. A bit premature to compare to Bell? by dabacon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Isn't it a bit premature to compare Google to Bell labs? I mean here are some things that happened at Bell labs: the invention of the transistor, the discovery the cosmic background radiation, a major role in the invention of the laser, the discovery of the mathematical theory of communication, the invention of the solar cell, etc. etc. While I love Google, I don't think they've quite lived up to Bell labs legacy quite yet (but here's hoping they decide to spend billions on fundamental research!)

    1. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by kognate · · Score: 2, Insightful

      But they _are_ spending billions on fundamental research. What do you think the "20% of your time on personal projects" is?

      They get to do fundamental research much more cheaply than places like Bell Labs do. This is partly because you're projects could go on for years and never get cancelled. And you get a massive amount of computing resources at your disposal.

    2. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by ebuck · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree.

      Google came up with the idea that popularity (in terms of links) makes a good algorithim to index the Internet, also they came up with the idea that you could serve such an index on a large cluster of cheap machines, instead of a few big expensive ones.

      All the other stuff they came up with afterwards wasn't very revolutionary. Web mail? Weather service? Statistic / Index pages? Educational indexes? Specific domain searches? Good services, but not revolutionary.

      Bell labs came up with a lot of theory. They created programming languages (B anyone?), operating systems (UNIX and Plan9), compilers, tools, and much, much more, like:

      # The first synchronous-sound motion pictures
      # Stereophonic sound
      # Speech synthesis
      # The cathode-ray tube
      # The radio altimeter
      # Radio astronomy
      # The laser
      # Solar cells
      # Coaxial cable
      # Radiotelescopes
      # Radar systems

      And that's not counting the nearly 25000 patents (most filed way before the great US patent give-away). They've made significant contributions to the fields of Physics, Mathematics, Communications, Computer Science, Astronomy, Aviation, Military Defense, and Power Generation, just to name a few.

      Google's got some good stuff, don't get me wrong, but they need to expand thier scope, double thier output, and hang around for another 80 years if they want to top the accolades Bell Labs has accquired.

      ---
      Yes, yes, we all know who invented the transistor.

    3. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Having also recently left Bell Labs it's safe to say at least Bell Labs is dead. You can tell when they close 70% of the bathrooms and shut off every other hallway of lights. All the smart people left, or are semi-retired, most of them before I even joined. It did so many great things in the past century but the executives have a very short memory and sadly ignore any new ideas originating from their own R&D, instead relying on "wall stree sources" or ambiguous "industry trends" which fly in the face of common sense to most of us.

      It's probably worthwile to use this latest defection to hold a belated funeral. Plan 9 is probably the last semi-useful project we'll see from that place. I'm also not real sure that Google is the future, so far they're short on product and long on ambiance. Research is fine but unless it's funded by academic sources you gotta have a product too. Ultimately that's what did Bell Labs in.

    4. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Call me when they invent something like a transistor.

      Look what this highly-educated super-smart guy is doing - 'fine-tuning web-crawling software'. Oooooo! Breakthrough tech!

      Actually, call me when they build a webserver from 200 TTL gates.

    5. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bell Labs primarily existed because it was the best propaganda an illegal monopoly could buy. It's trivial to point fingers at the "executives", it died simply because there was no longer reason for it to continue.

    6. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by zuzulo · · Score: 1

      Ok, this really gets me going. How are you going to put out a list like that and forget to mention the fact that Bell Labs invented the *transistor*? I mean, talk about something really important in the saga of modern technology ... ;-)

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    7. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by ph4s3 · · Score: 1
      Google came up with the idea that popularity (in terms of links) makes a good algorithim to index the Internet
      Actually, Google didn't invent this. They came up with their own algorithm to make it their own, but citation referencing is a quite established principle from (I think) library science and has been in use for a long time. Google just applied it to web sites/links instead of printed texts/bibliographies.
    8. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bell Labs used to make stuff that was truly excellent, so I have to disagree with you on that. Most of modern electrical engineering is based on principles developed or derived from subjects they pioneered.

      The propaganda started about 25 years ago, around the time the illegal monopoly got what was coming to it. That I agree with.

      I know blaming executives is in vogue, but I've worked with the ones in question. The level of corruption (and derived confusion) in that company is epic. I have first hand experiences with how they operate there. It's not trivial finger pointing, it's real. And it's entrenched. Now that I work elsewhere in a far more legit (although less imaginative) environment, I feel very vindicated in this opinion.

    9. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by jrootham · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My Dad worked at Bell Canada for many years. He claims that the high profits on military contracts did Bell Labs in for producing commercial products because the engineers lost cost discipline skills. Ma Bell broke a long term association (not sure when, 70's 80's?) because they weren't getting good product stuff.

      It's one thing to be not mind boggling strong on current products when you are doing basic resaerch and kicking out things like transistors every decade or so. But making money hand over fist with $500 toilet seats will tend to lose you some respect.

      Note the dates on the good stuff mentioned earlier. Almost none of it past 1970.

    10. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by drsquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What fundamental research is this? All I see from Google is web applications that have been done a million times before, but with slightly different interfaces. Excuse me if I'm not blown away by that. That 20% is only one day a week. What can you do in one day a week?

      I wouldn't describe them working at hyperspeed either. I mean gmail has been at the beta stage for how long? Remember this is a WEBMAIL service we're talking about, not a fusion reactor. It's a service which has a million equivalents on the Internet, gmail having a slightly slicker interface and some more disk space. That's it.

      Are there any companies doing fast-paced, ground-breaking research these days? Or do they all just chase profits based on existing stagnant business models?

    11. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by DerekLyons · · Score: 1
      But they _are_ spending billions on fundamental research. What do you think the "20% of your time on personal projects" is?
      A few hundred thousand, a couple of million tops. Nowhere near a billion, lets alone billions, and almost none of it (from the evidence to to date) on fundemental research.
    12. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      25 years ago was 1980 ... I think you can find numerous examples of Bell "inventing the future USA USA" propaganda going back to the 1950s if not eariler. Of course, much of it was true.

    13. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by nihilogos · · Score: 1

      And don't forget the quantum computer algorithm for finding prime factors in polynomial time.

      And subtract points from google for performing research into advertising.

      --
      :wq
    14. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A better comparrison would be of Microsoft or HP or IBM to bell.

      Microsoft: least they are investing something like $1b/year into blue sky reasearch at the moment. there is a differance between investment in blue sky.

      IBM: unfammiliar with the scope of their reasech but know that it is extensive.

      HP: these guys are really supporting blue sky reasrach. My old physics department had a few profs funded by HP and HP has employed people to do fundamental theoretical reasarch into physics (amongst other subject). http://www.hpl.hp.com/about/http://www.hpl.hp.com/ about/

      Google will probably only be a bit player in ther easearch market simply because they have such a narrow business model. Blue sky pays back when you have a large technalogical portflio so paying for pure reasearch may pay off in one of the feilds you work in down the line (5-15 years).

      Google essentially focuses on the conceptual information indexing and retrival (by this i mean i don't think they are doing work on novel hardware etc beyond relatively trivaill networking issues). this is not going to change the our lives.

      It may change some of the information we recive and how we mange information, but it's not going to offer any radical tangiable products or even theroteical work outside of realtively narrow constraints.

    15. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by egoriot · · Score: 1

      Avi Silberschatz also recently left Bell Labs (2003). You may know him from his operating systems and databases books. Lucky for me, he joined my department!

    16. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by halleluja · · Score: 1
      And that's not counting the nearly 25000 patents (most filed way before the great US patent give-away). They've made significant contributions to the fields of Physics, Mathematics, Communications, Computer Science, Astronomy, Aviation, Military Defense, and Power Generation, just to name a few.

      Yes, but with Google, they're finally able to find and understand what they're doing.

    17. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Personal projects and fundamental research are not the same thing. No structure, no team, to start with.

    18. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good grief, talk about US historical revisionism. Cathode Ray Tube? I don't think so.

      http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blcat hoderaytube.htm

      What'll be next? The wheel? Fire? Cognitive thought?

    19. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by OwnedByTwoCats · · Score: 1

      Bell labs suffered from the breakup of AT&T on January 1, 1984. As part of a regulated monopoly, funding basic research was easy, and everyone had to pay for it on their phone bill. After the breakup, AT&T lost the regulated revenue from the operating companies, so it could no longer pad the regulated bills with Bell Labs expenses.

      And then the wizards at Lucent made Dense Wave Division Multiplexing hardware, and the capacity of the already-laid fiber optic cable increased by an order of magnitude or two. Which drove down the price of long distance service to the point where AT&T is struggling, and will likely be bought out soon.

      Was all this the fault of Bell Labs?

    20. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Catiline · · Score: 1
      What fundamental research is this? All I see from Google is web applications that have been done a million times before, but with slightly different interfaces.
      Oh, you mean to tell me you don't think HCI (Human/Computer Interfaces) is a vital "fundamanetal research" topic? You seriously think that the computer itself is a signifigant enough tool to handle massive amounts of data?? Alright, boys, this man has just asked to have DOS and QBASIC again; it seems all the advancements since are of no value to him. "We don't need no stinkin' interfaces", eh?
    21. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Ben+Hutchings · · Score: 1
      Are there any companies doing fast-paced, ground-breaking research these days?
      Were there ever? Research generally seems to involve long periods of slow progress with only occasional breakthroughs.
    22. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      That's about right. Unix was the last worthwhile product from Bell Labs.

    23. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Wow, great strawman. Slightly tweaking an interface of largely insignificant software is hardly comparable with inventing the transistor. The GUI was a great innovation. Google hasn't invented the GUI, they've just moved the buttons about and changed the colour of the writing. And if they're doing fundamental research into HCI, why are their services not that user friendly? Gmail is pretty slow and awkward compared to other webmail services. The search engine is OK but nothing special. The interface for Google groups has got WORSE since they took it from Dejanews. How's that for advancement?

    24. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Catiline · · Score: 1
      I'm sorry, but your argument is the real strawman.

      Flemming discovered penicillin via experimental contamination; neuroscience was a chance discovery by Galvani; Roentgen discovered Xrays by coincidence too. The history books don't list many coincidental discoveries and yet the transistor was just the that. (FYI, the scientists were doing 'pure' research into crystal surfaces.)

      REAL (e.g. directed, purposeful) scientific research is slow, halting, and sometimes seems 'backwards' -- case in point, Einstein didn't like quantum physics. But just because some (or one, or many) people don't like something doesn't mean that it hasn't improved. Again, relativity was an improvement over Newtonian gravitation, but most contemporary scientists didn't like that, either. Immediate benefits aren't a requirement; you may not see the use of whatever esoteric research Google may be doing into improving PageRank again, but doesn't make it any less important. We probably won't really understand it until we all have billions and billions of (personal, business, and family) documents we need to organize: then, and only then, will the benefits become immediately visible.

      What made Bell Labs great wasn't the (practical) things that came out of it. That was just a side effect; what made Bell Labs wonderful was the atmosphere that was open to coincidental discovery. I'd like to believe Google has that -- but I'd sure agree they haven't shown it practically, yet.
    25. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by Watts+Martin · · Score: 1

      You're absolutely right. But I think a lot of the "I have met Bell Labs, and you, Google, are no Bell Labs" commentary I see in a responses here are missing the flip side of the equation here.

      If the article is correct, this is a vote of confidence in Google from a lot of bright people going to work there. The fact that what they're doing right now is just making snazzy web applications doesn't mean that they're not amassing some pretty serious talent. Whether that potential is going to go anywhere remains to be seen, sure. (Although I suspect that all of the people snarking about this are using Google "products" every day, repeatedly, and that many of us have switched from competing "products" as Google's roll out. They may simply be building better mousetraps, but the world is indeed beating a path to their door.)

      But what's a more interesting point here is that this is a vote of no confidence in some of the grand old think tanks of the computer era. PARC is still around but it's a shell. 15 years ago everyone wanted to catch up to SGI in their fields; now SGI is a historical footnote, and SUn is well on their way to following. And, Bell Labs, the grandest of the grand, has clearly withered in the Lucent years.

      Will Google be the "next Bell Labs?" Who knows. Desire and loads of money aren't enough -- Microsoft Research tried that route, but clearly hasn't been that successful (hi, Clippy!). But somebody has to be the next Bell Labs, because the old one isn't going anywhere anymore.

    26. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by happyduckworks · · Score: 1

      Does anyone know how many scientific journal papers are being published per Google researcher/per year? I bet it's a damn sight fewer than the rate for Bell Labs today, let alone Bell Labs of the monopoly era.

    27. Re:A bit premature to compare to Bell? by ebuck · · Score: 1

      So many had pointed out the transistor that I decided to dig a bit deeper. If it were an all-inclusive list. I'd still be writing it today!

  9. Oh Brother by jfonseca · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Oh Big Brother that is!

    If Google is to become what it seems to be morphing into we may well be staring at the next Microsoft.
    Remember Microsoft had similar early days, chaotic work environment, great brains, a management that hired more great brains....

    And...guys....they now have Rob Pike on the team. C'mon, concede already! Google has style.

    The question is...why not just go with the already existing Microsoft? Do we need another giant? I guess we do.

    --
    Broken Hearts are for Assholes. - Frank Zappa
    1. Re:Oh Brother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      C'mon, concede already! Google has style.

      Style != brains, you dipshit pedophile. Instead of pursuing something relevant like new power storage technologies or advanced physics now Rob Pike can fucking shill ads like "Microsoft? CLICK HERE FOR SOLUTIONZ" or "ENLARGE YOUR PENIS NOW"

      Oh well, it's his brain and career. There are others who won't be corporate whores.

  10. Boring. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The things that are created in Murray Hill, NJ have far more lasting effect than the short-attention-span theater that passes itself off as a "laboratory". Yes, the development takes longer but the innovations are more far reaching than some new blog management system or a new way to push AdSense.
    After all, Google is running on UNIX and where did UNIX come from? Kittens???

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

      After all, Google is running on UNIX and where did UNIX come from? Kittens???

      Uh, dude... what kind of computer courses did you take? Everyone knows UNIX is from ostriches...

  11. Bell the NSA. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Body of Secrets by James Bamford. Yes there's a connection between the NSA and Bell Labs.

  12. Just like Ron Howard by suso · · Score: 1

    You killed Bell Labs.

    1. Re:Just like Ron Howard by adpowers · · Score: 2

      I know, really. I searched this out myself when the story came out and my download has gone from a measly 34 kBps to a pitiful 7.7 kBps. Thanks for linking to it! :(

  13. How did he get a job at Google? by nxtr · · Score: 5, Funny

    Did he get an invite?

    1. Re:How did he get a job at Google? by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      "Hey d00d, w@nt to j01n my 1337 CLAN?"

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    2. Re:How did he get a job at Google? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He presented the Venti paper at a conference for Sean Quinlan because Sean was sick. Google engineers were impressed and invited them both to join.

  14. Trickle by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    'But products trickled slowly, if ever, from [Bell Labs]. They blast from Google at hyperspeed.'" (Painless demographic-only jump-through screen to read it.)

    Well, I guess:
    1) ISDN
    2) ATM
    3) SONET
    4) SS7 with respect to use external links to control messaging (aka out of band-signaling)

    Well, that is to name a few. Don't forget, Lucent is former bell labs and at one point they were putting out 2 patents a day. Not that I support pattens, but their is a lot of technology that comes out of the labs.

    5) Something called UNIX.

    1. Re:Trickle by alienw · · Score: 1

      Yeah, how about the transistor and about 60% of the stuff they print in EE textbooks these days? I don't think Google's nifty map software or text ads can quite match that.

    2. Re:Trickle by Forbman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Maybe not the software, but if we could look at the algorithms and system management software they use, it might be a different story.

      Part of their skill seems to be identifying and developing efficient and simple ways to do what everyone else has done so far in a bloated, complicated fashion, both in execution and implementation.

    3. Re:Trickle by sgt101 · · Score: 1

      Cell phones!

      --
      --------------------------------------------- "In the end, we're all just water and old stars."
  15. "Trickle" from Bell Labs? by birge · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Bell Labs has produced some incredibly important things: The femtosecond laser, which is one of the most important tools of chemistry and physics today. The radio telescope. Modern communications theory. A lot of basic electrical engineering theory from microwaves. I'm missing a ton of stuff, obviously, but you catch my drift.

    I suppose it's a little harder to come out with stuff once a week when what you're doing is a little more significant and deep than pretty scrolling maps. Comparing Google to the old Bell Labs is ridiculous, and suggesting that "PageRank" somehow compares to the scientific breakthroughs that occurred at Bell Labs is an insult to the people that worked there. I love Google, but it's not particle physics.

    Let's wait to see how many Nobel prizes come out of Google labs.

    1. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ooh! Ooh! I know!
      Zero! None! Nil! A big fat goose egg! The answer to the equation x minus x equals ??? Zilch! Naught! Zip! Nada!
      Folks, Mr. Pike is just trying to look all trendy and MTV for another potential employer. Give him two years and he'll post some screed on his blog about the ineptitude at Google "Labs".

    2. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

      Maybe a Nobel prize will come out of the telescope work he does in his free time?

      --
      [o]_O
    3. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by westlake · · Score: 1
      Maybe a Nobel prize will come out of the telescope work he does in his free time?

      Sooner or later, you have to move beyond theory and simulation to work with real systems. That becomes very expensive, very quickly.

    4. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 1

      When exactly did Einstein build a real system out of his crazy relativity ideas? :p

      --
      [o]_O
    5. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by HuguesT · · Score: 1

      Exactly,

      Note that Einstein never got a Nobel prize for his far fetched relativity work. He got it for his explanation of the photoelectric effect, something far more practical and measurable in those days.

    6. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by Kiryat+Malachi · · Score: 1

      1919.

      OK, he didn't build it, but his ideas were *tested*, which is equally important.

      --

      ---
      Mod me down, you fucking twits. Go ahead. I dare you.
      (I read with sigs off.)
    7. Re:"Trickle" from Bell Labs? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I worked at Bell Labs and now at Google. I think it's an excellent comparison. Actually I started making that comparison a while ago: what does a phone company need other than people installing the wires? A lot! Therefore all the great inventions. Same thing goes for search engines today.
      Note that the article said _products_ tricked slowly. All the achievements people talked about here are inventions, not products. At Bell we felt that it was extremely difficult to turn our inventions into products. It takes at least two years from ideas to any customers using them. At Google I can do that in a week.

  16. Perfectly sensible, in context. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How do you ask Rob why he moved *without* comparing them? I suppose the answer could be as boring as "they offered me more money", but when they clearly didn't, it would be unnatural *not* to talk about why he liked it more.

  17. off topic - intel vs amd at toms hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the counter for the intel crashes marked the intel platform crashing 3 times earlier tonight and now it only lists 1 crash?
    intel bias or is my hat on too tight?

    oh yeah, yea! some old dude is working at google...

  18. is this dude serious? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A mildy effective search algorithm and a ton of free webspace for your webmail definitely blows away ANYTHING bell labs ever created!

    Who could have ever thought of giving out gigantic webmail accounts? Musta took a lot of very hard research to develop that!

    The stuff that trickled out of bell labs wasn't the kind of stuff that comes from throwing a bunch of hardware at a problem...actually it usually involved inventing the hardware other people throw at problems...

  19. Timothy, be clear man! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    What kind of geek-speak is this. What are you saying in your post? Speak English man. And if the reason of using this kind of language is that you think that otherwise it is not 'cool' or interesting - then just don't post it.

  20. Re:I know something we'd all love to PIKE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    she's so hot

  21. Rob Pike's Excellent Adventure by Toilet_bowl_jihad · · Score: 1

    Strange things are afoot at the circle K.

  22. Re:All I can think about is Apple right now by Cutie+Pi · · Score: 1

    I have to say that reading about Bell Labs' heyday was part of what inspired me to go to grad school and get into research. Do you know that the transistor was invented at Bell Labs? How many corporate research labs outside of IBM would still sponsor that kind of work? The transistor didn't see success for a good 10-15 years. A company like HP would've under Carly Fiorina would've killed the project. The next best thing I can think of is Xerox PARC, but look what happened to them.

  23. Re:All I can think about is Apple right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    You idiot! This is a Google thread! Some smart rich guy has joined Google! There he will tweak software! Rejoice!

    There's just no room for your depression here on this fantastic day, son.

  24. Sorry, meant to start a new thread by Cutie+Pi · · Score: 1

    I guess my disbelief of the parent article made me forget to click on the back button. Sorry. Anyway, like I said, Bell Labs is cool.

  25. Wow by asciiRider · · Score: 3, Funny

    So every time I read an article about how great google is, it is usally about how the greatest minds in computer science are mostly having lunch and working on 'personal' projects .....

    No wonder they come up with such mind boggling products like: Email, News, News Groups, Online Shopping.

    1. Re:Wow by multipartmixed · · Score: 1

      Yeah. And their "News Groups" boggling product.. man, that was like Dejanews all over again!

      --

      Do daemons dream of electric sleep()?
  26. Dear Slashdot by learn+fast · · Score: 4, Funny

    Please stop making me feel bad for not working at Google.

    Thank you,

    learn fast

  27. Re:All I can think about is Apple right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I grew up during Bell Labs' heyday, and it makes me immeasurably sad to see what's become of basic research in the United States. There are remanents here and there, but the glory days are gone. In the future, the most important, society-changing inventions are going to come from overseas. Our day in the sun is over, I'm afraid. We're run by beancounters now.

    How many companies even do basic physics research any more? IBM perhaps. I can't think of too many these days. HP labs is pretty much dead. Bell labs is dead. Google? Don't make me laugh.

  28. Google did not "invent" cheap PC clusters by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yahoo had a large number of rackmount x86 boxes running FreeBSD before Google was even founded, back when it really was radical not to be running Solaris or Ultrix to run a "real" business.

  29. Re:How much of a cut would you take... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What's Google all about?
    Is it good or is it whack?

  30. Wuss by Alomex · · Score: 1

    The article has some interesting points, such as how Pike took a "huge pay cut" to go there just to work on cool things.

    If this is true then he is a wuss. There is no reason why Google could not have matched his salary at Bell labs.

    1. Re:Wuss by CrankyFool · · Score: 1

      From talking to both recruiters at Google and people who interviewed there (some of which went to work there), I've come to believe part of what makes Googlers happy is making people take paycuts to come work there. Makes them feel more leet.

    2. Re:Wuss by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're missing it. It may have been huge, but it's still probably double what you or I make in a year. It's not like Pike is working for $50,000 a year or something.

  31. Re:All I can think about is Apple right now by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    My life is a goddam wreck. I'm so depressed right now. I need someone so bad.

    How bad does that someone have to be?

  32. Wrong again /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure. :)

  33. Figured the same after Steve Bellovin left by anti-NAT · · Score: 1

    I don't know that much detail about his work history, however, it seemed that he and Bill Cheswick had been at AT&T / Lucent / Bell Labs forever, working away on information security. I noticed he recently left, as had Bill, which, after staying with an organisation for 15 or more years, usually means something significant is happening.

    --
    The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
  34. Money isn't everything, by anti-NAT · · Score: 1

    and he may have also received stock options, which can technically not be called "salary", as they may, although unlikely in Google's case, end up worthless (like my Worldcom Options).

    --
    The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
    1. Re:Money isn't everything, by Alomex · · Score: 1

      I know money isn't everything. Still there is no reason why $80B market-cap Google could not match Pike's Bell labs salary, other than being cheap that is.

    2. Re:Money isn't everything, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      There will be no money now, but on his deathbed, he will receive total conciousness.

      So he's got that going for him.

  35. It's that time of the week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For a Google story, anyone had withdrawal symptoms

    1. Re:It's that time of the week by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      El goog no comprehende.

      ow ow mama mia my anusii

      Leu Goatse!

  36. Uh... by keepper · · Score: 2, Interesting

    did you miss the part about him being hired PRE IPO.?

    In any case, that little gesture of him taking lesser salary, probably got him a few tens of thousands more options at the cool price of $0.99... So guess who is the "wuss" now.

    HEH

    1. Re:Uh... by Alomex · · Score: 1

      Even pre-IPO they were offering over $200K to some not-so-well known academics. C'mon, part of being a good corporate citizen is paying people what they are worth.

    2. Re:Uh... by anti-NAT · · Score: 1

      He might be "complaining" about taking a salary cut (although I doubt he is actually complaining), however, he could have turned down the job if he didn't like his package. He's obviously quite happy with the situation, otherwise he would have left. I'm sure he could find another, higher paying job if he wanted or needed to.

      Google wanted him to work for them, he sounds like he wanted to work for Google. An amicable deal was struck, which doesn't have to reflect the market value of his skills at all ...

      --
      The Internet's nature is peer to peer - 20050301_cs_profs.pdf
  37. Re:Uh... (in re: the matter of Brian Reid) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    200k in silicon valley doesn't go far, but
    5-6 digits of GOOG options do, if you can get it...

    ask dr. reid about how what google gives
    (119K shares at thirty cents), google can take away!

  38. No, the transistor was not invented at Bell Labs. by btarval · · Score: 2, Informative
    While everyone seems to accept as fact that Bell Labs invented the transistor, they really didn't. Transistors had been around for quite a long time before the Bell Labs team made their announcement. Alas, even the wonderful Wikipedia is horribly wrong on this point.

    What Bell Labs DID invent was the first Silicon Transistor. This was revolutionary. But to give them the credit for the first Transistor is to dismiss a lot of research which went on before this, as well as to show a general ignorance on the history of Electronics.

    It would be similar to all of us forgetting the invention of the Silicon Transistor, when Electron Transistors replace them.

    For example, the first Field Effect Transistor (FET) was patented by Dr. Julius Lilienfeld of Germany in 1926. Lilienfeld had other patents, such as patent 1,900,018.

    But the bottom line is that transistors were well-known long before 1948; it would be utterly silly to think that a lot of new concepts simply sprouted out of nowhere. It is far more accurate to say that Bell Labs took the old concepts and pushed the envelope, by applying them to a new area.

    And it's certainly silly to say that Bell Labs invented the transistor. Please, it's the silicon transistor that they invented.

    --
    The best way to predict the future is to create it. - Peter Drucker.
  39. Re:products? where by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    GMail is quite tangible, so are those ads they sell.

  40. Re:No, the transistor was not invented at Bell Lab by gwm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    But this is true of any invention; Bell Labs no more "invented" the transistor than Thomas Edison "invented" the light bulb or James Watt "invented" the steam engine. Sure, they made huge contributions--and deserve all credit for that--but they did so by standing on the shoulders of generations of other great scientists and engineers.
    It is a characteristic of human nature that we insist on simple answers to complicated questions, on convenient labels for complex entities.

  41. So much creative fun! by kronocide · · Score: 1

    I am in total awe over Google's unicycling, bean-baggy, non-conformist-business-cardy coolness. Everyone at Google has so much fun all day! Not like employees at ordinary companies. Those are boooring! It makes me want to be a cool web hacker! Hmm? What, it's not 1997?? Oops, my bad...

  42. Comparing Really Cool Places to Work by billstewart · · Score: 1

    The comparison isn't so much about the specific value of what Google's done in a couple of years vs. Bell Labs over many decades. The real comparison is that Google today and Bell Labs back in the day were Really Really Cool Places to Work. I was there from ~1978-1993 (not in Research, but I got to deal with the research folks on occasion), and there was an exciting culture of doing really amazing technical stuff. We were also The Phone Company, so there was also a culture of doing really dull gold-plated 40-year-depreciation-cycle engineering and the planning and accounting it takes to support them, so sometimes it was a bit slow moving (:-) but overall it was Really Cool. There were other places that also had that feel - some universities, some parts of some aircraft companies, probably Xerox Parc during its better years, and you'll find that a lot of the really good people from the remains of Bell Labs and/or AT&T Labs are now professors at universities near New Jersey.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  43. Nothing illegal about the Bell System monopoly by billstewart · · Score: 1

    Hey, the Bell System monopoly was perfectly legal - they'd done lots of work telling politicians that Regulated Monopolies would be a really good thing for the public, and the politicians got to hire lots of bureaucrats to regulate them, which politicians also liked. Some of the tradeoffs were valuable - gouging businesses and urban home phone services made it possible to reach most rural areas and provide affordable lifeline service for poor people. Some of them were clearly bad - the combination of telephone monopoly and FCC-granted broadcasting monopolies delayed the development of effective radio-based telephony by probably 40 years, and kept costs higher than they should be. On the other hand, it was better than the European-style government-run Post Office, Telegraphy, Telephony monopolies which took even longer to get rid ot.

    --

    Bill Stewart
    New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
  44. Re:products? where by zootm · · Score: 1

    Systems don't have to be paid-for to constitute "products", is my understanding of it. So you've got:

    GMail
    Google Maps
    Local Search
    Google Suggest
    All the "labs" stuff, which is many projects in itself.
    Hello
    Blogger
    Toolbar
    Desktop Search
    Groups (and Groups 2) ...and so on, all falling into the pretty wide term of "product".

  45. Re:products? where by retrosteve · · Score: 1

    Don't forget Picasa, which is mucho cool.

    Or check what's there today:
    http://www.google.com/downloads/

  46. Re:products? where by zootm · · Score: 1

    Good point. I knew I'd never be able to get them all, that's what the "...and so on" was about :)

  47. having dealt with Rob's theatrics while I was... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    at Project Athena, I can tell you all to sell your Google stock. He's a loudmouth and quite honestly a jerk who has the inability to step back and really evaluate his work.

    He kept pushing his own proprietary way of doing things even after X Window took off, and it was clear his windowing system was a) less effective and b) would never gain any mass appeal.

    The boys in Google will hate the old man who will inevitably keep insisting he's smarter than they are.

  48. Confusion Is More Like It by Black-Man · · Score: 1

    When I worked there, they had so many competing products... I lost track of the alphabet soup project names.

  49. Google = Google University by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ok, this is what I have believed for a while now, Google is actually 'Google University', meaning you go there, have a nice time, throw out some ideas...and that's it. It doesn't seem to me that the innovators at Google are even remotely concerned about profits or business models. They know that Google has enough cash now to survive for a while. Yes, for 5 years max. All those servers don't mean much if they aren't enterprise grade. I have seen one too many 'server errors' and 'not available' stuff on gmail. In conclusion, Google has been around for 5-7 years, and so far it has only developed a search engine which is popular. Everything else is research, betas, ideas. How about, ahem, products ? Infact, almost all except the search engine are stuff which I can code and supply to people all by myself. Here is a Google patent (one of the 11): Systems and methods for highlighting search results - A system highlights search terms in documents distributed over a network. The system generates a search query that includes a search term and, in response to the search query, receives a list of one or more references to documents in the network. The system receives selection of one of the references and retrieves a document that corresponds to the selected reference. The system then highlights the search term in the retrieved document.
    Inventors: Patel; Amit J. (Cupertino, CA); desJardins; David L. (Mountain View, CA)
    Assignee: Google Inc. (Mountain View, CA)
    Appl. No.: 734882

  50. In Google's defense by solomonrex · · Score: 1

    A lot of their brilliant stuff is behind scenes and purposefully secret. It can't compare to Bell Labs, but then the Internet is a vast, international group brain, and we're not sure how important it is itself. Google provides search, and that's really the core function of our "shared memory", the Internet. Plenty of people can/will provide search, and Google is 'just an advertising' company at it's core. But it's one of three major providers of the most important online service, and there's every reason to believe it will become more important and essential.

  51. From new OS invention to "fine tuning"? by justine_avalanche · · Score: 1

    It seems strange to hear that Rob Pike, a real original thinker who basically re-invented unix with plan9 (at least the network/gui side), is now doing "fine tuning" at google. I hope they have him work on some secret project where he will be able to put his imagination at work because 'fine tuning' doesn't sound so exciting...

  52. Yes, Google's profits are based upon stolen work. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    "And I'm leaving out a bunch of stuff."

    Yes you are. In your haste to glorify Everything Google, you're leaving out the fact that Henry Spencer did not own the tapes. Spencer stole the tapes.

    The tapes weren't his property. He went onto the University years later (arguably trespassing at least, if not breaking and entering) and stole them back.

    The University was never compensated for these tapes or the material they contained. Meanwhile, Google profited handsomely off of it.

    And I don't believe that Google has ever offered to make copies of the material easily available to any competitors.

    So the "Do No Evil" mantra from Google is just Marketing BS. It's amazing how many people swallow this stuff blindly. It's not based on fact. Witness their attempts at Reverse Domain Name Hijacking. And other sleezy actions.

  53. not for the money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    He may not have gone there for the money, but he certainly must have been expecting to do better financially there. Do a yahoo search for "insider stock sale google pike" to see the more than $5 million he got in 2004 alone. Funny, Google search doesn't find that page, at least anywhere near the top of its rankings...

  54. It's the end of an era by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Grateful Dead Chef is gone!

    It's all downhill from here!

  55. Re:Yes, Google's profits are based upon stolen wor by georgewilliamherbert · · Score: 1
    Yes you are. In your haste to glorify Everything Google, you're leaving out the fact that Henry Spencer did not own the tapes. Spencer stole the tapes. [...]
    I am not attempting to glorify everything Google in any way. I respect the good things they have done. I certainly don't believe they have never done anything wrong at all.

    I asked Henry about your ridiculous accusation, and he responded, and I quote with his explicit permission:

    The Usenet archive tapes were *loaned* to Dave Wiseman, of U of Western Ontario, because he was interested in copying the contents onto more modern media. We don't seem to have kept an organized record of exactly when that happened -- it wasn't considered an important event -- but indirect evidence places it no later than March 1992, and almost certainly in late 1991.

    At the time, I was still full-time U of T staff and head of Zoology Computer Systems, so this was my decision to make. My superiors were barely aware that the archive tapes existed, and had no interest in being consulted about minor operational decisions. (The intrinsic value of the tapes was already approaching zero, due to their age and the transition to 8mm tape for backups etc.)

    I went part-time and stepped down as the head of the facility at the end of June 1992, but remained U of T staff (although with lines of authority less clear) until summer 1993.

    Last I checked, Dave Wiseman still has the tapes. They remain officially the property of U of T Zoology, but I've checked with my successors several times over the years, and they have consistently denied any interest in having the tapes back -- Zoology no longer has a drive that can read them or a rack to store them properly.

    Henry Spencer
    henry@spsystems.net

  56. If Google won a Nobel Prize by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

    Let's wait to see how many Nobel prizes come out of Google labs.

    I agree with you, broadly speaking. But I'm sipping a glass of good red wine, I'm feeling expansive, let's conduct a thought experiment.

    If Google Labs were to win a Nobel, it would be ...

    * Economics: the new digital economy;
    * Peace: "Do No Evil" put into practice.

    As to the remaining categories -- Physics, Chemistry, Physiology or Medicine, Literature -- I don't see anything coming from Google.

    -kgj

    --
    -kgj
    1. Re:If Google won a Nobel Prize by birge · · Score: 1
      Economics: the new digital economy

      For advertising connected to web searches? Not their idea, or even a very brilliant one at that.

      Peace: "Do No Evil" put into practice.

      That prize is usually given to somebody who sets their aspirations higher than simply avoiding evil. Hell, I avoid it pretty well myself. Nonetheless, we'll see how Google does in this regard. They may find it hard to stay out of evil when they find themselves knee deep in everybody's personal information and somebody offers them a ludicrous amount of money or power or avoidance of indightment just for a peek. As with government, the concentration of wealth (in this case of the information kind) will beg for corruption despite all original intents otherwise.

    2. Re:If Google won a Nobel Prize by handy_vandal · · Score: 1

      Economics: the new digital economy
      For advertising connected to web searches? Not their idea, or even a very brilliant one at that.


      Not for ads ... they'd have to come up with something seriously revolutionary. I'm not saying they've got such a thing -- I'm speculating that if their vast resources were turned toward a Nobel of some kind, Economics is the only field that makes sense.

      Peace: "Do No Evil" put into practice. That prize is usually given to somebody who sets their aspirations higher than simply avoiding evil. Hell, I avoid it pretty well myself. Nonetheless, we'll see how Google does in this regard. They may find it hard to stay out of evil ...

      It's way too late for Google, their corporate soul is just that: corporate. Sure, I'm pleased with their Do No Evil maxim; but Google may turn out to be the friendliest Big Brother we could ask for.

      -kgj

      --
      -kgj
    3. Re:If Google won a Nobel Prize by birge · · Score: 1
      Not for ads ... they'd have to come up with something seriously revolutionary. I'm not saying they've got such a thing -- I'm speculating that if their vast resources were turned toward a Nobel of some kind, Economics is the only field that makes sense.

      Oh, I agree then!