Slashdot Mirror
Google Striking Fear into the Corporate Masses
SpectralDesign writes "The New York Times reports that Google is striking fear into the hearts of even unrelated industries. From the article: 'We watch Google very closely at Wal-Mart," said Jim Breyer, a member of Wal-Mart's board. In Google, Wal-Mart sees both a technology pioneer and the seed of a threat, said Mr. Breyer, who is also a partner in a venture capital firm. The worry is that by making information available everywhere, Google might soon be able to tell Wal-Mart shoppers if better bargains are available nearby.'"
Hell, I can tell you a better place to buy crap than Wally World... It's called Costco.
They don't treat their employees like EA coders, and you can still buy cheap.
I didn't even need Google for that.
-- El Sacarino tiene gusto de la chocha
. . . so capitalism is best with perfect information. Wal*Mart no doubt would like as close to perfect information about its customers and what they might be willing to pay in a given market. But they cry foul when the tables are turned and their policies of discriminatory pricing based on region and neighboorhood might be in jeapordy. Go figure.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
http://www.pakin.org/complaint/ COMPLAINT GENERATOR. SIMPLE.
Just a few years ago, Google was nothing. Now entire industries are shitting their pants, because they are incapable of understanding Google's business model.
Google has become ubiquitous; They make products people want to use. And they don't even feel compelled to say "customer satisfaction is our number one priority!" on every sign, railing, and even doormat in the building.
While other companies (and even industries) are struggling to lock consumers into their own little slice of the marketing pie, they have not figured out a way to get people to stop going to google for products or services. And that scares the bejesus out of them. It's not that hard; run the business and stay in the black. Give people what they want, instead of offering them a product and telling them that they want it because you want what's best for them.
The worry is that by making information available everywhere, Google might soon be able to tell Wal-Mart shoppers if better bargains are available nearby.
What they really should be worried about is workers finding out that other companies actually pay living wages and provide good health coverage, unlike Walmart.
OK, so thats the retail environment for you. Now, you'll notice that the price discrimination is enabled by one thing: differential access to information, or the "cost of search" if you want to think of it that way. You're already assuming that the cost of search for a better deal is going to be greater than the savings you'll realize. Question: do you consider $6 an hour for boring tedium a good use of your time? Many, many millions of people whose opinions are very valuable at Wal-Mart world headquarters do. The ultimate nightmare app for Walmart would be a scanner attached to your cellphone (already widely available here in Japan) which would just scan all the items you need and tell you "Buy pickles, diapers, baby formula, and orange juice at Walmart. Go to the Jewel three minutes away for apple juice, note paper, and their 8 for the price of 3 pizza deal."
Another thing retail loves is called a loss leader -- something which is a staple, like milk, priced so low it will actively get people to come into your store, where they'll naturally buy other items which are priced higher. This works because people might know, for example, that $1.50 a gallon milk is an absurdly good deal, but putting together a list of all the items you need is very difficult, so you just get people to comparison shop on a few high-profile items and nickle-and-dime them on, say, cereal. (This is also one thing small stores LOVE to do to Wal-Mart, since it is very, very difficult to beat Wal-Mart's pricing across the board.) You can have loss-leaders which are much more expensive than milk though -- computer monitors, for example. And that + google = scare the pants off of you if you work in retail. Because it will bring people to your store for the purpose of getting the loss leader and *nothing else*. Best Buy calls these sort of customers "demons" (Google it, interesting article on the phenomenon) -- if you can exploit the information gap between you and the store you can tremendously cut into their business.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
I'm not sure why this is modded insightful. As a member of Wal-Mart's board, it is his job to do what's in the best interest of Wal-Mart and its shareholders, not the general public. Railing against a businessman for doing what makes sense for his business is more than a little silly.
I'm no fan of Wal-Mart by any stretch of the imagination, but I'm a capitalist at heart, and seeing comments like these make me scratch my head in confusion.
What is humor if not pain tempered by time?
Whatever happened to caveat emptor?
Price-matching isn't about the consumer, it's about competitors. When a retail store announces that it will match prices, it is telling its competitors that it wants to end a price-war. When the competitors follow suit, the price-matching serves as a mechanism so the corporations in question can see who is breaking the "terms" of their cartel action. In essence, price matching is collusion to keep prices higher.
Black and grey are both shades of white.
As it's shaping up right now, Google, monopoly or not, is beginning to look like the only thing that might possess the throw-weight to successfully counter the otherwise alarming trend that has recently manifested itself among almost all large capitalist enterprises, and that is the trend of restricting and choking access to information/data/operating code to the point where no one is able to access/use/employ that information/data/operating code without the considered permissions of whomever "owns" it.
We now live in a VERY dangerous time in which the scales seem to be tipping in favor of an Orwellian outcome where all information is locked down tight and any attempt to look under the hood or otherwise perform any "unauthorized" operation on any information/data/operating code is met with a draconian response of severely criminalizing those who would attempt to do so.
As it stands now, Google seems to be the only large capitalist entity that would further its interests by tearing down any and all restrictions on information/data/operating code.
As loathsome as the business of political lobbying may be, it is now incumbent upon Google to get cracking in the seats of political power to ensure that information/data/operating code is kept as open and free as possible.
No one else has the clout that Google now possesses, and therefore no one else has a prayer of achieving the absolutely vital goal of keeping information open and free.
Should this endeavor fail, some very dark times await us.
That Google may be a monopoly is, at present, something that we're just going to have to ignore. We can't have our cake and eat it too, so we must, unfortunately, cheer on Google as it becomes even larger and more powerful.
Should the battle to free information/data/operating code be won (and it is by no means a certainty), then and on then may we turn our attentions toward Google itself with an eye toward reducing such excesses of size as exist at that time.
For now, Google is the enemy of our enemies, and is perforce our friend.
Is it fascism yet?
So when IBM worked with Hitler to exterminate the Jews... the fucking shareholders, man! Think of the fucking shareholders!
This is a rhetorical example, but seriously. There have got to be limits to what a corporation is allowed to do in pursuit of the almighty dollar, but you never hear any of the Ayn Rand-types talking about that. But capitalism is no magic utopia where the invisible hand stops pollution, disposes of hazardous waste properly, or ensures that children are fed and cared for even if their parents are drug-addict deadbeats. Time and time again, corporations show to us that they are untrustworthy on their own, and will always do the most profitable thing, no matter how many lives they destroy in the process.
When a true genius appears, you can know him by this sign: that all the dunces are in a confederacy against him.
No, Google is your friend. Google seeks to create and share information others create. As long as they believe in and fight for the right of others to do the same, they are your friend. This is the exact opposite and the cure for the insane but inate will to control others you see. The truth does set you free.
We now live in a VERY dangerous time in which the scales seem to be tipping in favor of an Orwellian outcome where all information is locked down tight and any attempt to look under the hood or otherwise perform any "unauthorized" operation on any information/data/operating code is met with a draconian response of severely criminalizing those who would attempt to do so.
Ah, true, but you do not go far enough in your understanding of collective oligarchy and current law. Creating and sharing information is also against the rules by the DMCA, a very real law. You are supposed to mindlessly consume information fed to you, not examine, share or even remember it. Control of information is key to establishing an Orwellian society. That society proves it's existence to itself through suffering. The result is a society that exists to make you misserrable.
In the pathetic WalMart example you see the motivation and an indication of how absolutely that motivation is applied. They are paranoid. Perfect information might hurt their sales and ability to take your money. Walmart is also freaky about taking pictures in their stores and other petty details. It's all about power and control. The small scale of this power and control is a good reason to be afraid. It indicates that no detail is too small to be controlled and manipulated. Power demands absolute power and the will to power is part of human nature. Small minded people get a kick out of such petty control but it's part of all of us and it's implications are much larger.
Orwell recognized this about human nature. He drew his conclusions from experience in the colonies of the British Empire, as a tramp in Paris and London, a witness to communist revolutions in Spain and the second world war. These were all terrible experiences where the ordinary rules of conduct were removed and people were free to do oppress each other in any way. So, I'll quote the master:
'The rule of the Party is for ever. Make that the starting-point of your thoughts.'
' You understand well enough how the Party maintains itself in power. Now tell me why we cling to power. What is our motive? Why should we want power?'
He knew in advance what O'Brien would say. That the Party did not seek power for its own ends, but only for the good of the majority. That it sought power because men in the mass were frail cowardly creatures who could not endure liberty or face the truth, and must be ruled over and systematically deceived by others who were stronger than themselves. That the choice for mankind lay between freedom and happiness, and that, for the great bulk of mankind, happiness was better. That the party was the eternal guardian of the weak, a dedicated sect doing evil that good might come, sacrificing its own happiness to that of others.
'You are ruling over us for our own good,' he said feebly. 'You believe that human beings are not fit to govern themselves, and therefore --'
He started and almost cried out. A pang of pain had shot through his body. O'Brien had pushed the lever of the dial up to thirty-five.
'That was stupid, Winston, stupid!' he said. 'You should know better than to say a thing like that.'
'The Party seeks power entirely for its own sake. We are not interested in the good of others; we are interested solely in power. Not wealth or luxury or long life or happiness: only power, pure power. ... The German Nazis and the Russian Communists came very close to us in thei
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
" Do you honestly think that the majority of consumers care about where their products are made? "
Oh yes, I think they do. That's why I think these brands link themselves to American products/ US Atheletes etc. to give the impression of being a US product (Or Swiss or Italian or whatever).
"What most people care about is getting stuff, and artificial intelligence and the internet (which is really what this article is about, not Google per se) is making this cheaper by stimulating competition."
I say this again and again, price isn't everything, value for money is. If you can't tell if an Italian Luxury handbag is really an Italian Luxury Handbag and not just a Chinese bag with some finishing done in Italy to qualify for the "Made in Italy" label, then how can you determine value for money? Any search you get from Froogle doesn't help with that.
Plus how much can you save? Is it worth the extra drive and extra time? I really don't think Walmart has much to fear there.
Have you ever worked for a union? I have. And by and large, they promote mediocrity. On a not-so-personal level, take a look at American automakers. The unions are strangling them, and one of the reasons they turn out junk is because of the unions. American cars are decidedly average, and that's what unions promote: being average. In fact, where I worked, if you were better than average, you were looked down upon and made to feel unwelcome.
What is humor if not pain tempered by time?