Slashdot Mirror


Google Base Launches

An anonymous reader writes "As announced on the Google Blog, Google Base has finally launched. According to Google, Google Base enables content owners to easily make their information searchable online. Anyone, from large companies to website owners and individuals, can use it to submit their content in the form of data items. We'll host the items and make them searchable for free."

337 comments

  1. Good for 'public' sites by b0r1s · · Score: 4, Interesting

    But bad for private intranet sites. For anything where privacy is significant, the Google appliance (or Google mini) will still be in high demand. The

    --
    Mooniacs for iOS and Android
    1. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Well obviously. Why would Google deliberately introduce a service that would obviate the need for

    2. Re:Good for 'public' sites by AKAImBatman · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Good for 'public' sites But bad for private intranet sites

      I'm not certain that it's "good" for anything. Pretty much all the previous Google apps were something you could "get" just by checking into it quickly. However, most regular people don't truly understand the concept of a formal database. As a result, we usually need other metaphors to help them understand the databases their using. (e.g. A filing system, a card index, etc.)

      What Google Base is proposing is very interesting (though of dubious use at the moment), but I just don't think that users are going to be rushing to grab ahold. Users will continue to keep their recipes on their computers or Recipe Database websites, jobs will continue to be posted on Monster, and life will otherwise continue on as is.

      Nice try Google, but I think this one has a long way to go until it's out of Beta.

    3. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Parent is not offtopic. Mod abuse, mod abuse!

    4. Re:Good for 'public' sites by DMouse · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Don't you see that it's not about being useful for joe average, but as a way for people to feed google pre-digested data feeds that describe their websites. This is a white hat search engine optimisation tool. And the fact that you can upload content using ftp to upload rss files just makes it a walk in the park. Really, too friggen easy.

      The fact that I am thinking about uploading my local job site's content just so that i can actually search it is beside the point, right? ;-)

    5. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Great! Now you can search for people in your local area selling their souls:

      http://base.google.com/base/search?q=souls+for+sal e

    6. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah you're right, nothing will ever change. Fuckit, why bother doing anything unless it's perfect the first time. It's the end of history.

      Brain the size of a planet...

    7. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What Google Base is proposing is very interesting (though of dubious use at the moment), but I just don't think that users are going to be rushing to grab ahold. Users will continue to keep their recipes on their computers or Recipe Database websites, jobs will continue to be posted on Monster, and life will otherwise continue on as is.

      Maybe until they start noticing that their Google Base content start appearing in their main index, Froogle, and other services. It says this may happen if the relevancy is good enough on Google Base. Quite a deal for being free.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    8. Re:Good for 'public' sites by DarkEdgeX · · Score: 1

      Seeing as search results from the main Google search engine, as well as Froogle and Google Local will contain results entered via Google Base, I think you'll see a pretty quick uptake on Google Base by people wanting to get their items contained within these new search results.

      Call me crazy, but I don't see how HR people or advertisers wanting to sell their products will pass this up.

      --
      All I know about Bush is I had a good job when Clinton was president.
    9. Re:Good for 'public' sites by jrockway · · Score: 5, Funny

      >> in high demand. The [...]
      > obviate the need for [...]

      Q: How many ADD kids does it take to change a light bulb?
      A: Hey, wanna go ride bikes? ;)

      --
      My other car is first.
    10. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No offense here, but how is this a "white hat" "optimisation tool"? Where is the optimisation aspect? And surely you know that black hats will be better and faster at using it...

    11. Re:Good for 'public' sites by TarrySingh · · Score: 1

      True, Our mini (which arrived today), check out my blog for pics, is something we've been waiting for quite a while!

      --
      Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
    12. Re:Good for 'public' sites by n54 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Interesting... would this person happen to be you? http://base.google.com/base/items?oid=674339201900 4287296

      It states: "You have my word on that my soul is pure and clean. I have never commited any sins or other bad acts, so please skip the 2 cents offers."
      but I would contend he has already in the ad made at least the following sins:
      - lying (about never ever having done anything even remotely bad)
      - selling his soul (a sin in the eyes of a overwhelmingly large portion of religious humans, incidentally the group that are most likely to accept the concept of a soul in the first place, and many of whom would not even accept the validity of trying to sell it or that the seller is actually the owner of his own soul)

      So the soul is obviously not in mint condition :) Has the person ever had a heartache? Any kind of trauma or other bad experiences? Denied God, Satan or any other such entity? Number of reincarnations if any? The list goes on and on to make an attempted appraisal. It seems obvious that the person is a virgin physically, that's at least one selling point but it would need to be documented to affect the selling price :)

      Most buyers would probably want a guarantee on the souls condition from a higher authority if quality is meant to be a selling point.

      In addition there is little product information, nor any guarantee or expiration date (the expiration date would be the time for which the seller could guarantee conferred ownership of the soul). If such a date is unknown to the seller many buyers could arrange such a date for their own purposes as long as it does not include any reverse transferral back to the seller. And most important of all the seller has not defined exactly what his soul is, most buyers would for example feel that they could litigate if buying the soul does not imply a full 100% direct control over the sellers soul at all times including all which that implies (by tradition; the sellers thoughts, actions, feelings, senses and soforth).

      And what of those who would be interested in buying the soul for official purposes such as proving they have a soul (at least one)? If you have a deed to a human soul (even if transfer has not occured yet) could one not claim to be eligible to human rights, nationality, etceterea? Perhaps absurd right here and now but some time in the future it might not be, it could be a legal loophole for synthetic intelligences to gain human rights if otherwise denied such. All of this is a seperate futures market but does make it neccessary that the sale has an approved legal status in whatever human justice system the sale takes place, the seller needs to provide documentation to such effect if this is the market he's going for.

      Any possibilites of "try before you buy"? What are the delivery arrangements?

      What are the contractual agreements for exchange of the money and the soul? Almost all buyers would agree to an infinite sum if the transfer is immediate and includes the traditional implications.

      The seller should be noted that all things considered the likely buyers would want the traditional contractual arrangements and a signature in the sellers blood witnessed by the buyer or representatives and confirmed by DNA comparison of the blood with three sample biopsis from any part of the sellers body, internal or external.

      --
      this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
    13. Re:Good for 'public' sites by ichigo+2.0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Hey, I have ADD you insensitive

    14. Re:Good for 'public' sites by jZnat · · Score: 4, Funny

      In Soviet Russia, ADD

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    15. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Irish_Samurai · · Score: 1

      No redirects, cloaking, link spamming, or hijacking for starters.

      The white hat reference alludes to SEO people who do not try to stretch the definition of the product or servce they are optimizing a search for. White hats would rather have your site show up for relative terms that result in a conversion without employing techniques from the list above.

      Black hats may or may not do this, but they also incorporate slimey practices from the list above.

      The biggest problm with SEO is that people serch in many different manners. As a result what may seem like relevant content to one may seem like trash to another. This tool allows people to attach attributes to their content. I am just making an assumption here, but I believe that Google then applies a ontology algorithm to these attributes so that related data will be easier to find.

      It's also possible that these attributes are directly mapped to common keywords in the main google index. This could facilitate an automated process of introducing new content to the main index with greater accuracy than allowing the spiders to do it. Currently things such as the "sand box" and link exchanges dirty the index in very subtle yet significant ways.

    16. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All your base are belong to GoogleGoogle

    17. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Wildfox01 · · Score: 1

      So? I am have ADHD. I think this is funny! It's true. You say something about a bike?

    18. Re:Good for 'public' sites by suwain_2 · · Score: 1

      I get that you're making a joke, but it's really not funny. I think a lot of people on Slashdot have

      --
      ________________________________________________
      suwain_2 :: quality slashdot p
    19. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All your Google Base are...

      Can I have some more milk duds please?

    20. Re:Good for 'public' sites by ToasterofDOOM · · Score: 1

      Yeah me ... uh ... ?

      --
      I am Spartacus
    21. Re:Good for 'public' sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, tell that to the bazillion postings this site has had today...

    22. Re:Good for 'public' sites by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      Well I for one

      Milk Duds?

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    23. Re:Good for 'public' sites by CasmirRadon · · Score: 1
      I tried telling my girlifriend this joke (she did have ADHD), and before I could get to the punchline she interrupted me to talk about some bird she saw at school. Never did get back to saying the punchline.

      I'd like to think she knew the joke, and was making a funny point of her own. Sadly, this was an all too common occurance.

  2. Has to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    All your Google base are belong to us.

    1. Re:Has to be said by Dante+Shamest · · Score: 4, Funny

      Balmer retorts: You have no chance to survive make your time.

    2. Re:Has to be said by AKAImBatman · · Score: 4, Funny

      Jobs exclaims: What you say?

    3. Re:Has to be said by Doomstalk · · Score: 0

      Somebody set up us the bomb... er, Vista.

    4. Re:Has to be said by joe_n_bloe · · Score: 1

      Damn, both of you were just too quick on the draw. I didn't even *see* it ....

      *sigh*

    5. Re:Has to be said by Deathbane27 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Cache all 'Zig'!

      --
      If it ain't broke, it needs more features!
    6. Re:Has to be said by S.+Ballmer · · Score: 1, Funny

      Someone set up us the chair!

    7. Re:Has to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When will this joke ever die?

    8. Re:Has to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      When will this joke ever die?

      You have no chance to survive make your time.

    9. Re:Has to be said by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      anti-thrust jury panel: For great justice.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    10. Re:Has to be said by slashdottinitup · · Score: 0

      More accurately: All your base are belong to Google.

    11. Re:Has to be said by flibble-san · · Score: 4, Funny

      Google: Hahaha

      --
      My other sig is crap too
    12. Re:Has to be said by rdoger6424 · · Score: 1

      GOOGLE!!

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    13. Re:Has to be said by rdoger6424 · · Score: 1

      I guess slashdot doesn't support japanese text. I think it was supposed to look like this:

      Yep, they don't support it here
      How about: Kimitachi no kichi wa, subete Google-ga itada ita

      --
      "Hello 911? I just tried to toast some bread, and the toaster grew an arm and stabbed me in the face!"
    14. Re:Has to be said by dreamchaser · · Score: 1

      Someone has set us up the mailbomb!

    15. Re:Has to be said by IchNiSan · · Score: 1

      Yahoo: Someone set up us the bomb.

    16. Re:Has to be said by jZnat · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sony: main screen turn on.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    17. Re:Has to be said by Tibor+the+Hun · · Score: 1

      nice, one could even say that all his base are belong to you.

      --
      If you don't know what AltaVista is (was), get off my lawn.
    18. Re:Has to be said by captjc · · Score: 1

      Hey...put down the crack pipe and listen to yourself. That joke is to geeks as ranting is to Dennis Miller. Mellow out and get used to it or else you are on the way to destruction.

      --
      Slow Down Cowboy! It's been 1 hour, 47 minutes since you last successfully posted a comment
    19. Re:Has to be said by 1+(smarterThanYou) · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it really be: All your base are belong to Google?

    20. Re:Has to be said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In A.D. 2005
      War was beginning.
      Gates: What happen ?
      Balmer: Somebody set up us the killer app.
      Balmer: We get signal.
      Gates: What !
      Balmer Main screen turn on.
      Gates It's You !!
      Googles: How are you gentlemen !!
      Googles: All your database are belong to us.
      Googles: You are on the way to destruction.
      Gates: What you say !!
      Google: You have no chance to survive make your time.
      Google: HA HA HA HA ....
      Gates: Take off every 'FUD' !!
      Gates: You know what you doing.
      Gates: Move 'FUD'.
      Gates: For great monopoly.

    21. Re:Has to be said by dcapel · · Score: 2, Funny

      Slashdot says: You know what you doing.

      --
      DYWYPI?
    22. Re:Has to be said by fbg111 · · Score: 1

      When will this joke ever die?

      Probably never. Even as it dies out among one generation, someone from the next will chance upon it in an old Usenet archive or somewhere and resurect it. Crusty old fogies will get a chuckle as the noobs start the conspiracy again, then some online rag will expose it, and it will go into hibernation again until someone from the next generation... repeat for all eternity.

      --
      Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
    23. Re:Has to be said by OBeardedOne · · Score: 1

      Close but no cigar...

      All your base belong to Base!

  3. Oh great by fmwap · · Score: 3, Funny

    Great, so now our top results are going to be clutered with samples of the info we're really looking for

    Thanks, google

    1. Re:Oh great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude, if you're going to hassle Google, you're going to get modded down. You must be new here.

  4. World Domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I'm paying even odds that in twenty years, Google is the oppressive world government. They've add their fingers to 10 or 15 big new pies per week, and it's only a matter of time before they get to the governmental one.

    1. Re:World Domination by yamum · · Score: 5, Funny

      Yeah but it'll be a government running Linux!

    2. Re:World Domination by Patrik_AKA_RedX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, it would be the first oppressive regime that makes information easily available to its minions.

    3. Re:World Domination by coralsaw · · Score: 1

      ... but similar to all other oppresive regimes it 'crawls' all over its minions too. Unless of course you walk around with a robot.txt tatoo on your shoulder.

      --
      <before>now</before>
    4. Re:World Domination by cyclop · · Score: 1

      Yes, but by controlling the searchable information, I guess not all of it will be easily available in the Google Reich.

      Anyway I'm liking much more the Google Reich than the Microsoft or Apple Reichs. Not that I'm not ready to change my mind...

      --
      -- Patent no.123456: A way to personalize /. comments with a sig attached to the end.
    5. Re:World Domination by SausageOfDoom · · Score: 2, Funny

      They're already running our governments, or at least the people behind Google are.

      They couldn't read our brains with their satellite beams, because we out-smarted them with our protective foil hats. Instead they created a puppet company to create a popular search engine, and now they wait for people to send in their thoughts so they can combine them with their satellite images and records of our email and shopping habits.

      But I'm onto you! You won't catch me running your desktop search!

    6. Re:World Domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      Isn't the Arabic term for "base" ...

      ... Al-Qaeda?

    7. Re:World Domination by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Nope. It's just Qaeda.

      Drives me nuts when idiot newspeople say, "The Al-Qaeda organization..." or, even better, "The Al-Qaeda bases in...", which of course translates to "the the base bases in..."

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
    8. Re:World Domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, I for one would be happy for a world government run by Google, at least if they still followed their princible of doing no evil.

    9. Re:World Domination by AgentSmith · · Score: 1

      I'm afraid your attempts to use foil hats to 'foil' our mind control attempts
      were all a ruse of our making.

      Foils hats are wrong.

      If you are still wearing your foil hats: The Matrix says Google Base is bueno!

    10. Re:World Domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Running a private version of Linux.
      They have not given their file system enhancements into the public domain.

    11. Re:World Domination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, cuz we all speak Arabic...

    12. Re:World Domination by SatanicPuppy · · Score: 1

      Like I speak arabic? But I still know what it means. To me, it's just a sign that people have no fricking idea what they're talking about. Supposed experts who know absolutely nothing, but aren't afraid to pass their appalling ignorance off as fact.

      --
      ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
  5. Data integrity by afaik_ianal · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Does anyone know what they are planning on doing to make sure data is up to date?

    I can just see things happening like a school putting up all of their course information and not keeping it up to date.

    1. Re:Data integrity by puppetman · · Score: 5, Informative


      The company I work for has been participating in this for a few months now. We upload content once per night. Data items that were in the feed from the night before are removed if they aren't in the most current feed.

      Data is expired if there is no activity on it after a period of time. There is also an expiration date.

    2. Re:Data integrity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think this is a real issue. Like Wikipedia, this idea has great potential. Like Wikipedia, this will have many problems. What's to stop this from suffering under a heavy load of spam, honest mistakes, and deliberate mischeif?

    3. Re:Data integrity by quokkapox · · Score: 2, Funny
      Does anyone know what they are planning on doing to make sure data is up to date? I can just see things happening like a school putting up all of their course information and not keeping it up to date.

      Yes, because the web itself contains no broken links and no outdated information. It would be criminal to pollute such a reliable resource.
      --
      Kerry/Edwards 2004 !!!!! I love SONY!!!!

      --
      it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
    4. Re:Data integrity by afaik_ianal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I agree that there are a lot of mistakes on the web, but I'd expect it to be harder to keep Google Base up to date because if an organisation is going to make a website, they have a lot more work to do up front (register a domain, buy hosting, create the actual site).

      I imagine it would be quite common for someone from an IT department to hear about Base, decide to put up ad hoc info about his organisation, then forget about it. That's far less likely for a website.

      Further to that, websites are currently organisations' primary presence on the internet. A secondary presence like Base is likely to fall by the way side before their website does.

    5. Re:Data integrity by truckaxle · · Score: 1

      How exactly is this different than froogle....

    6. Re:Data integrity by kotku · · Score: 5, Informative

      I have a google account and have played around with it a little. Part of the integrity bit seems to be using spam filtering techniques to prevent you creating SPAM entries in the database. See below thier editorial guidelines.

      ----

      The most effective item communicates a clear message to a targeted audience. Once you determine whom you want to reach and develop appropriate text, you need to create an item that will inform users. The Google Base Editorial Guidelines will help you create effective items to meet your goals

      Underlying all the Editorial Guidelines are two simple principles:

              * Be honest, accurate, and factual.
              * Clearly and accurately describe your message.

      Our ultimate goal is your success, and we believe that providing a great user experience is the best way to ensure it. To submit items to Google, you must adhere to these guidelines.

      Use Standard Punctuation

              * No repeated and unnecessary punctuation or symbols.
              * Your title may not contain an exclamation point.

      Use Standard Capitalization

              * No excessive capitalization such as "FREE" or "GOOGLE BASE."
              * Capitalization of the first letter of each word within a URL is permitted.

      No Repetition

              * Avoid gimmicky repetition.

      Use Correct Spelling

              * Check that you use correct spelling.

      Use Proper Grammar

              * Your item text must be in relevant, logical sentences and must contain grammatically correct spacing.
              * The use of symbols, numbers, or letters must adhere to the true meaning of the symbol.

      No Unacceptable Phrases

              * Your item cannot contain universal call-to-action phrases such as "click here," "link here," "visit this link," or other similar phrases that could apply to any item, regardless of content.
              * Use a call-to-action unique to the information you provide.

      No Inappropriate Language

              * Your item cannot contain offensive or inappropriate language.

      Adhere to the Program Policies

              * As a business, Google must make decisions about where we draw the line in regards to the items we accept. We, therefore, may not accept items containing some content or relating to certain products or services. We reserve the right to exercise editorial discretion when it comes to the items we accept on our site, as noted in our terms and conditions. Please note that the decisions we make concerning items in no way affect the search results we deliver. To learn more, please review our Program Policies.

      --
      The bikini - security through obscurity since 1943
    7. Re:Data integrity by hendrix69 · · Score: 1, Insightful

      >> Does anyone know what they are planning on doing to make sure data is up to date?

      I think items automatically expire within a maximum of 31 days.

      --
      The power of Christ compiles you!
    8. Re:Data integrity by moonbender · · Score: 2, Informative

      It's not limited to products and prices? As in, it's a totally different thing? It may be based on the same tech though, hardly surprising since it's from the same people.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    9. Re:Data integrity by akmarksman · · Score: 1

      "Data is expired if there is no activity on it after a period of time. There is also an expiration date." Honey,the data has expired..and look there's a missing person listed on the side. LOL

      --
      Marine Sergeant: Did I give you permission to b*tch, soldier?
    10. Re:Data integrity by mindriot · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I think this is a real issue. [...] this idea has great potential. [...] this will have many problems. What's to stop this from suffering under a heavy load of spam, honest mistakes, and deliberate mischeif?

      s/this/the Internet/g;

      Yes, sure it will be subject to deliberate mischief. But the same goes for the Internet as a whole—because, well, those pesky humans are using it.

      I wouldn't be so pessimistic about it. The problems of spam, mistakes, and deliberate mischief aren't technical ones, they're social ones. That's why I think that technological advances for acquiring information are more of a good thing than a bad thing. Don't hail the information you get as the Ultimate Truth ("I saw it on the Internet, it must be true!")—rather, as always, proceed with caution...

    11. Re:Data integrity by mikkom · · Score: 1
      I think this is a real issue. Like Wikipedia, this idea has great potential. Like Wikipedia, this will have many problems.
      but unlike wikipedia, this thing is 100% commercial and owned by Google and the contents are not under any kind of open licence so all you submit belongs to Google. I think that is one of the main problems of the service.
    12. Re:Data integrity by oboreruhito · · Score: 1

      * No repeated and unnecessary punctuation or symbols.
      * Your title may not contain an exclamation point.
      * No excessive capitalization
      * Avoid gimmicky repetition.
      * Check that you use correct spelling.
      * Your item text must be in relevant, logical sentences and must contain grammatically correct spacing.
      * The use of symbols, numbers, or letters must adhere to the true meaning of the symbol.
      * Your item cannot contain offensive or inappropriate language.


      Well, nobody on /. will ever get to use it.

    13. Re:Data integrity by Stormy+Henderson · · Score: 1

      mikkom wrote: all you submit belongs to Google....one of the main problems of the service

      No it doesn't.

      From their TOS: Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google Base. You or a third party licensor, as appropriate, retain all patent, trademark and copyright to any Content you submit, post or display on or through Google Base and you are responsible for protecting those rights, as appropriate.

    14. Re:Data integrity by OneIsNotPrime · · Score: 1

      Hope my post is acceptable:

      http://tinyurl.com/8bo77

      --

      ---

      WARNING:Slashdot karma not redeemable in the afterlife.

  6. What exactly goes into base? by obli · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What exacty goes into base? As I've understood it everything is supposed to go into Google base, right?

    Could wikipedia be imported to Google base?

    1. Re:What exactly goes into base? by hackstraw · · Score: 0, Redundant

      What exacty goes into base?

      All your base are belong to us.

      Sorry, couldn't resist.

    2. Re:What exactly goes into base? by mikkom · · Score: 1

      I think that it cannot be done because of difference between licences of Wikipedia and Google base. Other is 100% commercial, other is open.

    3. Re:What exactly goes into base? by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1
      Could wikipedia be imported to Google base?

      In principle yes, but in practice any item in base is limited to 1000 characters (no HTML markup) plus 10 images.

    4. Re:What exactly goes into base? by AxelBoldt · · Score: 1

      From the Terms of Service: "Google claims no ownership or control over any Content submitted, posted or displayed by you on or through Google Base. "

    5. Re:What exactly goes into base? by pmsyyz · · Score: 1

      Anyone is perfectly free to use Wikipedia content for commercial purposes.

      See GFDL.

      Materials for which commercial redistribution is prohibited generally cannot be used in a GFDL-licensed document, e.g., a Wikipedia article, because the license does not exclude commercial re-use.

      --
      Phillip
  7. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  8. Restricted to "content owners"? by ReformedExCon · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Does the TOS really restrict this? And does such a clause make it necessary for them to police the database for infringements?

    --
    Jesus saved me from my past. He can save you as well.
  9. Scary Pace by superpulpsicle · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it me or does it seem like Google is average 1 new service/product every 2 months or so. This is a scary pace. The part I am most amazed by is that ALL their services scale very well.

    1. Re:Scary Pace by RWerp · · Score: 1

      Dude, this is the new monopoly coming in. Google$ it will be called on Slashdot anytime soon.

      --
      "Long run is a misleading guide to current affairs. In the long run we are all dead." (John Maynard Keynes)
    2. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Is it me or does it seem like Google is average 1 new service/product every 2 months or so. This is a scary pace.

      I agree. I actually think this can be confusing. It's great they're producing so many interesting things, but I keep having to hear about them by "word of mouth" in online discussions. Otherwise, I wouldn't even know they existed. It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of updates to the services they provide, possibly just some small blurb on search result pages or something. And they need to do something like make a menu of all their services just a click away from any main project page, search result page, or any other page from their site. Sure, they have the Google Labs page, but at the moment that doesn't even mention Google Base. They need to consolidate navigating through these services in their interface. By the way, have you heard of Google Moon?

    3. Re:Scary Pace by Jugalator · · Score: 4, Informative

      It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of updates to the services they provide, possibly just some small blurb on search result pages or something.

      You could always join the Google Friends newsletter:
      http://www.google.com/contact/newsletter.html

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    4. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      Dude, this is the new monopoly coming in. Google$ it will be called on Slashdot anytime soon.

      Ehh ... you mean on Googledot :-)

    5. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      Thanks for that. Of course, I had to hear about that by "word of mouth" online, too :)

    6. Re:Scary Pace by panaceaa · · Score: 4, Funny

      It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of updates to the services they provide

      They do, it's called the Slashdot home page. In fact, there's even a simple reminder mechanism called Google Dupes.

    7. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What the fuck is this then?

    8. Re:Scary Pace by baadger · · Score: 1
    9. Re:Scary Pace by leomekenkamp · · Score: 1

      A bit off topic, but funny: did you try to zoom in to maximum magnification? If not, please try. Humour seems to be appreciated at Google.

      --
      Wenn ist das Nunstueck git und Slotermeyer? Ja! Beiherhund das Oder die Flipperwaldt gersput.
    10. Re:Scary Pace by VJ42 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nah, that makes "Googles" and dosn't look right, it'll be Goog£e (espicially as th £ sign actually comes from the 'Libera', the Latin word for pound

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, you have no reason to search me
    11. Re:Scary Pace by MacGod · · Score: 1

      It reminds me quite strongly of EPIC 2014, a conceptual animation put out last year that seems eerily prescient in many ways.

      --
      "Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one " -Albert Einstein
    12. Re:Scary Pace by Momoru · · Score: 1

      "The part I am most amazed by is that ALL their services scale very well." Perhaps you missed the Analytics rollout?

    13. Re:Scary Pace by shokk · · Score: 1

      Keep up with Google's releases with their blog: http://googleblog.blogspot.com/atom.xml

      --
      "Beware of he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart, he dreams himself your master."
    14. Re:Scary Pace by trollable · · Score: 1

      The part I am most amazed by is that ALL their services scale very well." Perhaps you missed the Analytics rollout?

      But Analytics is written in Python ;)
      BTW, AFAIU, Analytics was not developped at Google, at least originaly. That may explain some of the problems (but not the broken links, etc.)

    15. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1

      Yup, tried that out first thing I came across it.

    16. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Google$ it will be called on Slashdot anytime soon.

      No No No No No.

      Don't be so parochial.

      Googl€
    17. Re:Scary Pace by Smack · · Score: 1

      They scale very well??? How many recent Google projects have ground to a halt on their first day of release? Google Analytics was DOA just this week. It's been pretty unimpressive.

    18. Re:Scary Pace by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't you mean Goog£€?

    19. Re:Scary Pace by Gulthek · · Score: 1

      If you, you know, browsed around google's site sometime you'd find all this good stuff. The blog, the newsletter, the labs, etc.

      It's not like they're hidden or anything.

    20. Re:Scary Pace by markusbkoch · · Score: 2, Informative

      Or you could subscribe to the Google Blog Feed and get all those news the day they are made available, instead of once a month

    21. Re:Scary Pace by alexo · · Score: 1


      >> It would be useful if they actually provided some simple notification of
      >> updates to the services they provide, possibly just some small blurb on
      >> search result pages or something.
      >
      > You could always join the Google Friends newsletter:
      > http://www.google.com/contact/newsletter.html


      Or you could just check SlashDot.
      Every time Sergey Brin flatulates, you can read about it on the front page.

    22. Re:Scary Pace by Duncan3 · · Score: 1

      Actually, they have only one product. YOU. They pimp you out to advertisers.

      That's what advertising companies do.

      --
      - Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
    23. Re:Scary Pace by adpowers · · Score: 1

      Well, I imagine in the 9+ months they owned Urchin before releasing Analytics, they were porting all the code to run on their scalable back end systems (GFS, BigTable and the like). Of course, Analytics was pretty poor the day it was released, and still doesn't have much information. I guess they didn't give it a cluster big enough or something.

  10. It sounds great, just like Wikipedia by MattskEE · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Like Wikipedia, this idea has great potential. Like Wikipedia, this will have many problems. What's to stop this from suffering under a heavy load of spam, honest mistakes, and deliberate mischeif?

    1. Re:It sounds great, just like Wikipedia by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, actually, this is not like wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, so it is restricting itself in the kind of information and the way it is presented. My Honda civic car would not be relevant to Wikipedia (Pope Benedict's former Volkswagen however gained some relevance during it's ebay selling - so does the car of JFK during his Dallas visit).

      And, of course, it is a wiki.

      Google Base is not an encyclopedia and it is not a wiki. It is offering a much more flexible way of storing data while making it public - combined with the usual way of making it searchable in an easy way.

    2. Re:It sounds great, just like Wikipedia by mateomiguel · · Score: 2, Funny

      These days, my experiences on the internet make me wonder how the world itself can survive under a heavy load of spam, honest mistakes, and deliberate mischief. Can someone explain that to me?

    3. Re:It sounds great, just like Wikipedia by Vulcann · · Score: 1

      and deliberate mischeif?...

      This brings about the next question ...would this allow mp3 swapping ??

    4. Re:It sounds great, just like Wikipedia by LnxAddct · · Score: 1

      On the site it says that they have spam filtering, all data has an expiration date, and some other forms of quality control. Looks like they are prepared for this.
      Regards,
      Steve

  11. API Interface by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I wonder if Google will have any plans to create an API for base, or at least integrate it into their existing search API. It would be pretty neat to be able to create applications that would automatically submit the information for you, rather than having to perform the bulk-upload method that I suppose *could* be automated...

    Thoughts?

  12. So wait... by Ctrl+Alt+De1337 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So, regular Google is their search crawlers going out and indexing information, while Google Base is people submitting information to be indexed in categories that submitters assign themselves. Is that right? Or is there more to this? Is this like a subsection of the search engine, or an informal free webhosting service? I'm just not sure of what this is or why it's necessary.

    1. Re:So wait... by quiddity · · Score: 2, Interesting

      yes, yes, and yes. and neither are they, thats why they stuck it out in the wild, to see what happens to it. they're smart like that..
      this is everything you (we!) can think of. all on a crisp clear white bckground. think geocities, but you can try and report the user if its spam/vandalism.

      only limits seem to be:
      -only 30 attributes per item
      -no export, only import and display on google at base.google.
      both of which might change

      sneaky smart bastids.

      --
      .
      . hmmm
    2. Re:So wait... by mblase · · Score: 2, Informative

      Is this like a subsection of the search engine, or an informal free webhosting service? I'm just not sure of what this is or why it's necessary.

      The important details I'm getting from Google's own site are:

      - You can post existing item types like Products, Recipes, Jobs, Want Ads, Vehicles, Reviews, Reference Articles, People Profiles, and more. Think of it as you're posting an entry with specific attributes (Product: Price, Quantity, Condition, Brand...) and keywords (anything you can think of), along with a description.

      - When you search Google Base, you have the normal Google search interface, but you can also toggle specific keywords on and off with a single click. This is something that would be impractical in Google's normal web search, but can be done in a highly structured database.

      - You can post anything you want (they screen out spam), but it's mostly text and no more than ten pictures--minimal multimedia. Bulk uploading is possible using RSS. Google becomes your free content host, but (again) you're limited by the highly structured types of data you can publish. So it's no replacement for a webpage-hosting service.

  13. Didn't work for me by CrazyJim1 · · Score: 3, Informative

    I tried publishing something and it told me I published over 200 articles already. Then I clicked 'save draft', and it gave me an error.

    1. Re:Didn't work for me by thesnarky1 · · Score: 3, Informative

      If you login, this goes away. It probably means that some 'guest' user has put up 200 posts in total. Good to make sure people register email with you, huh?

    2. Re:Didn't work for me by TropicalCoder · · Score: 2, Informative

      Worked great for me! I published a couple of software items that I offer on my web site. The only problem I encountered was in the label field - I couldn't use an acronym (it complained about too many capital letters). You can ask for a dispensation, but this will take time as humans review your request.

  14. will this be another wikipidia? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    sound like single (as in url location) database of massive information to me.

  15. Just sayin... by GreggyBUIUC · · Score: 4, Funny
    1. Re:Just sayin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh yeah, I got in at $100/share. I'm holding on to it. As a web developer, if I can't beat them, I may as well own them. :)

    2. Re:Just sayin... by gregbains · · Score: 1

      Very good, and thanks to you I found this, and that highlights the one thing Google is doing wrong, they don't show new products/services off well.

    3. Re:Just sayin... by burns210 · · Score: 1
      s/I/I/

      You forgot the most important one!

    4. Re:Just sayin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a GoogleFuture ahead of us! http://www.derekyu.com/?p=55

    5. Re:Just sayin... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That, or you don't read Slashdot enough. :-)

  16. API? by protohiro1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    If they release an api for this...holy crap. How incredibly useful. One could, say, write a content management system that runs on google base rather than mysql or whatever. Or who knows what other cool shit the hackers will come up with. This concept is SO powerful its kind of...freaky. So much of the internet could fit onto this one little idea.

    --
    Sig removed because it was obnoxious
    1. Re:API? by hagrin · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There will still be a need for mySQL/SQL Server/other DB options for certain types of applications like forums, etc. However, you're 100% right, with an API the possibilities are endless in terms of what you could include in their indexing.

      The one factor that will keep this happening is performance and speed. Adding an additional 2 hops for database content won't make much sense for web applications. I can't see replacing local network queries with external queries to Google's Base system. Good call though on the API.

    2. Re:API? by DysenteryInTheRanks · · Score: 2, Insightful
      How incredibly useful. One could, say, write a content management system that runs on google base rather than mysql or whatever.

      I know! Just imagine: the sophistication of a MySQL database plus the speed of an HTTP connection!

      It's sort of like putting your money in a piggybank -- a piggybank not in your bedroom, but on *the other side of town*.

    3. Re:API? by masdog · · Score: 2, Funny

      It's sort of like putting your money in a piggybank -- a piggybank not in your bedroom, but on *the other side of town*.

      Like a bank?

    4. Re:API? by panaceaa · · Score: 1

      Adding an additional 2 hops for database content won't make much sense for web applications.

      There wouldn't be an extra two hops if you're fetching the data from the client-side with AJAX or Macromedia Flex. In fact, Google Base's servers might be faster than your own hosting. Of course, I don't think it makes business sense to store user data solely with Google, but the performance penalties can be factored out.

    5. Re:API? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You missed the point entirely.

    6. Re:API? by kosmosik · · Score: 4, Insightful

      > The one factor that will keep this happening is performance and speed.

      The other (probably the most important) problem will be with legal options (like terms of use).

    7. Re:API? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, for forums this may speed certain functions, such as searching, up.

    8. Re:API? by protohiro1 · · Score: 1

      Yes, but that isn't really the point. Of course a real application would be faster resident on your own server with your own database. But the fact that you COULD write a cms with a google back end was the first think that popped into my mind. I just think that there is a lot of potential for fun hacking with this service. You could have a blog that stores its post in google base...or who knows...something cool could happen.

      --
      Sig removed because it was obnoxious
  17. I'm disappointed... by HellsAngel · · Score: 4, Funny

    for a minute there I thought they were finally launching Copernicus Center, their Lunar base.

    --
    WTF?
  18. Google base is broken by afarhan · · Score: 1

    I tried the google base. i tried creating a new content-type called 'Presence' it crashes with the message '-5.5'. the site is unstable as of now.

    --
    The purpose of all philosophers was to impress women
    1. Re:Google base is broken by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's funny. I ran it for 3 seconds and it was incredibly stable!

  19. Check out the program policies page by wordisms · · Score: 3, Informative

    http://base.google.com/base/base_policies.html/

    The list of banned content is great!

    Hacking and Cracking Sites - Posting is not permitted for the promotion of hacking or cracking. For example, items must not provide instructions or equipment to illegally access or tamper with software, servers, or websites.

    Aids to Pass Drug Tests - Posting is not permitted for the promotion of products such as drug cleansing shakes and urine test additives.

    Too much!

    1. Re:Check out the program policies page by Anonymous+Writer · · Score: 1
      Hacking and Cracking Sites - Posting is not permitted for the promotion of hacking or cracking. For example, items must not provide instructions or equipment to illegally access or tamper with software, servers, or websites.

      That's not cool. What about legitimate hacking? The quote mentions examples of illegal methods, but the scope could be broader in practice. There's also mention of mod chips on the list, citing copy protection circumvention as an example, but what about legitimate mod chips? The "Posting is not permitted for the promotion of body parts or human remains" is hilarious, but what's the deal with "Posting is not permitted for the promotion of raw precious metals"?

    2. Re:Check out the program policies page by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aids to Pass Drug Tests

      This strategy is a zillion times more effective than those high-priced kidney sweepers: Don't take drugs.

      (and, of course, it is a zillion times more sucking)

    3. Re:Check out the program policies page by panaceaa · · Score: 1

      Aids to Pass Drug Tests - Posting is not permitted for the promotion of products such as drug cleansing shakes and urine test additives.

      Clearly this is to prevent Google employees from finding jobs elsewhere. Now we know what they're spending all their IPO money on!!

    4. Re:Check out the program policies page by Kuciwalker · · Score: 0

      but what's the deal with "Posting is not permitted for the promotion of raw precious metals"?

      Google doesn't want Google Base to be used as a wholesale commodity exchange.

    5. Re:Check out the program policies page by gmuslera · · Score: 1
      The program policies seems to be targetted for a particular use of Google Base, in an eBay clone or something similar, while the potential so far looks far beyond that. Is like google invented the brick, and the policies are like "you must have a door" as if houses are the only thing that can be built with bricks. Maybe those policies are somewhat standard for ebay-like sites, but as non american didnt liked the items or landing pages targetting US must be in English, as there could be some for the i.e. spanish (or any other language) community in US.

      Also as living in a country not covered by Google Maps (Uruguay, at least in the non-satellital view mode) the location part is actually doing some discrimination (i.e. i can have a map pointing to my whatever resource and you cant). I know should be matter of time, i know that not even the US are fully covered, but when you start to integrate features, and some of them are partial, holes in ones affects the whole thing.

    6. Re:Check out the program policies page by alexo · · Score: 1


      > Posting is not permitted for the promotion of products such as drug
      > cleansing shakes and urine test additives


      urine test additives... Dammit, I suspected that I forgot to add something to the urine test.

      Now I know why it tasted like piss.

  20. Google Base Slashdotted... by Electrawn · · Score: 1

    For Slashdot, this is a royal flush, no?

  21. Hmm...Porn? by CriminalNerd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Sexual Content
    (Adult) Posting is not permitted for the promotion of child pornography or other non-consensual material.

    Does that mean people are allowed to post most of their pr0n? That would be...disturbing...Interesting for others, but not for the soccer moms.

    1. Re:Hmm...Porn? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    2. Re:Hmm...Porn? by tehshen · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what filters they're using but when I search for porn, I get slashdot. What's going on there?

      --
      Guy asked me for a quarter for a cup of coffee. So I bit him.
    3. Re:Hmm...Porn? by Al_Lapalme · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your use of the word 'most' disturbs me

      --
      Al
  22. I think Google got Slashdotted by joe_n_bloe · · Score: 1
    Oops!

    There was an error with the page you requested.

    Please check back later.

    1. Re:I think Google got Slashdotted by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, google's blogspot bandwidth got slashdotted. Good effort though.

  23. Like Froogle by quokkapox · · Score: 5, Informative
    Data is expired if there is no activity on it after a period of time. There is also an expiration date.

    This is more or less what was done with companies wishing to have their product database indexed within Froogle.

    It was actually a nice implementation for a complicated process, and it only took them a week to approve our data feed and begin listing our items.

    We upload a new feed as frequently as we need to.

    --
    it's a blue bright blue Saturday hey hey
  24. druggle by grungebox · · Score: 4, Funny

    So if we can use Google Base for free, does that mean we can free base? Far out, man.

    1. Re:druggle by TubeSteak · · Score: 1
      Reminds me of this t-shirt
      Crack?
      Shit Son...
      I was doing that back when it was just called FREEBASE.


      Anyways, when I saw Google Freebase, my first thought was
      "why is google getting into B.A.S.E. jumping?"
      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    2. Re:druggle by mblase · · Score: 1

      Problem is, the data is hosted exclusively by Google's servers. So, in fact, all your Base does belong to Google.

  25. Secret Ingredient by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    The part I am most amazed by is that ALL their services scale very well.

    Most people probably don't know about this, (and it's why they're so secretive about letting people see their data centers). See, the secret is actually that their entire supercomputing grid is based on the unreleased Microsoft Windows Cluster Vista 2006, which they license on a per-processor basis. This advanced technology, developed by Microsoft, is what allows them to attain such mind-boggling customizability, scalability, and response time.

  26. open the API, many sites suddenly become redundant by davejenkins · · Score: 4, Insightful

    sites like vehix.com, orbitz.com, and finance.yahoo.com are essentially taking data from some goofy mainframe format (Reynolds & Reynolds, edgar, etc) and simply skinning it and making it searchable via the web. If those original database holders (data OEMs if you will) decide to plug in here, many of those sites just took a giant step toward redundancy.

    I don't think such sites are kaput, because the retail experience holds something of value in and of itself (all the customer care bits). But Google gets a helluva lot more powerful, certainly.

  27. 30 Day Expiration? by SledgeHBK · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Most types of items (such as products, services, housing, autos, wanted ads, jobs, travel, events, and news) automatically expire after 30 days. "

    I'm kinda confused. Is this only referring to the actual commercial items being put up for sale, or is applying to most everything?

    I was going to tell my fiancee about this and get her started on creating her own model horse database (she's a collector). I don't think it would be a good way to go if the above is true.

    Could somebody clarify this for me and/or show me some sort of good out-of-the-box software that could be used in this way (collection of items, with pictures, description, etc.).

    1. Re:30 Day Expiration? by anandsr · · Score: 1

      You are right that most types of items expire after 31 days.
      But the important thing is that not all types will expire after 31 days.
      An example is a recipe.
      More importantly you can create your own type. This will not expire.
      So for a model horse database you will create a model database type and use it for your purpose.
      This will not expire.

    2. Re:30 Day Expiration? by lieumorrison · · Score: 1

      In regards to stuff expiring in 31 days... it looks like 'active items' expire into an 'inactive items' folder, and it seems like all you have to do is just reactivate it again. If this is true, I don't think this is a bad feature because it causes users to keep an eye on of their info and frees up resources when stuff is ignored by the item creator.

      --
      | Information is the currency |
  28. mod parent up by moultano · · Score: 1

    I only write this because it is likely to be missed.

  29. Sim Earth by aywwts4 · · Score: 1

    And here I was reading the title thinking google had reached the nanotech age of enlightenment and launched itself into space like at the end of sim-earth.

    --
    Web Developers: Celebrate to our roots! Animated Gifs and Tiled Backgrounds, dont let our history die!
  30. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  31. Obligatory by Pesh+Hawksfire · · Score: 2, Funny

    I'm in your google base. I'm killing your google mans!

    1. Re:Obligatory by Metteyya · · Score: 0, Redundant

      All your base are belong to Google!

  32. Copyright violations? by mikeburke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I can imagine this becoming a great source of copyright issues - google you have no way of knowing where your content came from - pictures, reference articles - even recipes. For example it's really not hard to imagine someone posting up all the recipes from their Delia Smith cookbook collection.

    Who is going to police all this aggregated, easily searched content? The only rational strategy for google is to wash their hands of it and have some kind of content editors responsible for acting on complaints.

    Sure, this issue isn't exactly new to the internet, but by storing it, indexing it, making a tidy profit from it (via adwords) and no doubt painting a nice, publically available API over it, I find it hard to believe it won't be long before various organisations are up in arms.

    1. Re:Copyright violations? by Lehk228 · · Score: 1

      recipes are not copyrightable, occasionally they can be patented in special cicumstances.

      --
      Snowden and Manning are heroes.
  33. What? no anynymous id? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The reason why Craigslist is so popular is the anonymous nature of the poster.

  34. Google Base = GBay by kote-men-do · · Score: 1

    I'm seeing fields for quantities, expiration dates, descriptions, ... With a little more work and GooglePay integration this will be the GoogleBay.

  35. easfdq by snark23 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Larry: I've been trying to infer structure from web pages all day, and boy are my arms tired!

    Sergey: Hey Larry, what if we could trick our users into supplying structure along with their data?

    Larry: Why, we would rule the world!

    [Larry and Sergey burst into song...]

    ~

    But seriously, this is way cool. Here's where Google Base could go from here:

    1. Allow more complex data types (the AJAX interface is beautiful and simple, but really limiting... maybe allow more complex types to be built through an API?) I'm thinking of structures and some kind of instantiation system.

    2. Publish a really rich library of types. What they've got right now is a good start, but more common types will prevent people from creating redundant and not-quite-identical types. For instance, if there had been a "Slashdot geek" category, we wouldn't all have had to create our own when we entered ourselves into the 'Base after reading this headline.

    3. Allow data to be restricted to groups of users. Google already has concepts of users and groups, so this is a no-brainer... a few customized viewing pages, and it could replace Flickr, Blogs, ... everything. Just by the example details you can tell it's poised to kill craigslist's classifieds.

    (about the subject title... my cat wrote it just now when he jumped onto my laptop, and it seemed as good as anything I was about to come up with)

    1. Re:easfdq by SnprBoB86 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      2. Publish a really rich library of types.

      Or allow machine learning to generate one :-)

      --
      http://brandonbloom.name
    2. Re:easfdq by smoker2 · · Score: 2, Funny
      (about the subject title... my cat wrote it just now when he jumped onto my laptop, and it seemed as good as anything I was about to come up with)
      Maybe there should be a new moderators option (+2 Pussy)
    3. Re:easfdq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Craigs list allows sexual content though.

    4. Re:easfdq by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This Google Base idea is truly Epic.

  36. base by sewagemaster · · Score: 1

    gentlemen, with all the googling going on, we'll arrive at 3rd base in no time...

  37. a new API for search by techrunner · · Score: 2, Informative

    Think of this as a different API for the search application. Google base often points to data outside of google. The only requirement is that everyone labels their data and gives the labels to google.

    Going through cars, there are pull down menus to select the year, price range, etc.. Previously, you could either 1- go to google.com and hope you get lucky or 2- Go to every listing service and do searches of their databases

    The main advantage is that this gives access to the deep web or the hidden web. It gives the google user the ability to search databases that were previously invisibile.

  38. Re:open the API, many sites suddenly become redund by BitchKapoor · · Score: 1

    I can't vouch for the other sites you mentioned, but Orbitz is considerably more than just skinning some static data feeds, and moreover isn't that mainframe-dependent these days. Check out this article by Paul Graham for more information. The pricing engine they use is by ITA Software, and it's actually quite complicated and compute-intensive.

  39. So.. PageRank? by mcc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The details here seem rather scant. What search algorithm? Is this just like a normal database search? Or is there any way data can be searched using something like PageRank?

    Because if this is just a normal database, meh, I could do that myself. But if I could in some way define a group of webpages and then perform pagerank-intelligent searches within that group, that would be a lot more interesting.

    Are people allowed to define new "kinds" of information to search for, or only new attributes? And is Google Base available through a Google API like interface? Because I don't see anything about that on the site right now.

    1. Re:So.. PageRank? by snark23 · · Score: 1

      It seems that user-defined types are limited to a type name and a series of attributes ("details"). Attribute types are limited to primitives like "Web URL", "text string", "location".

      Hopefully they do expand the type system to allow for richer types (generalized algebraic data types, anyone?)

      I don't see anything about an API either, but I think it's a fair bet that Google will supply one at some point. They've been very good about APIs for their other services.

  40. It's broken. by melikamp · · Score: 4, Funny

    I cannot find any porn. I think it is broken.

    1. Re:It's broken. by fizzyabbo · · Score: 1

      That's a common rookie mistake. You gotta take the "safe search" off.

  41. What about copyright? by adnonsense · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A brief search reveals some recipies reproduced from an external site. There is a link provided, but no indication what copyright the recipie is under; the same for a recipie copied from Wikibooks (a clear GFDL violation).

    1. Re:What about copyright? by esconsult1 · · Score: 1

      Recipes are not copyrightable.

    2. Re:What about copyright? by EMIce · · Score: 1

      Not exactly. It's kind of like an algorithm, you can rewrite it under some circumstances using different constructs. You can't do this for more than a few in a copyrighted cookbook, or it is a violation.

      http://groups.google.com/group/rec.food.cooking/br owse_thread/thread/89a947eca7b6b016/fb97fc55d1d9af f2

    3. Re:What about copyright? by tarm · · Score: 1
  42. Hosting Images and API's by MBoffin · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apparantly you can link directly to a Google Base hosted image. This means basically free image hosting with virtually unlimited bandwidth. I wonder how long it will be until Google clamps down on this, if at all.

    Here's an example.

    Frankly, I'm more interested in when the API's come out for this thing. The kind of apps people will build that take advantage of this will be quite interesting. Hmm... Things might get pretty interesting pretty fast once the API's are out.

    1. Re:Hosting Images and API's by moonbender · · Score: 2, Informative

      Of course, there are a number of services that have been offering free image hosting with virtually unlimited bandwidth for some time. Mostly every blogging service does, but images hosted by ImageShack have been popping up everywhere, because it's freakishly easy to host an image with them - registration is optional, for one thing. I doubt Google will clamp down on it, I'm sure they were aware of it when they started (the beta of) Base.

      So really, image hosting isn't what's new about Google Base. In fact Google Base instantly reminded me of ImageShack, it's (close to) the simplicity of IS applied to not just images, but article style content. Of course IS has really taken off because people have needed space for their images forever - to post them in internet forums, mostly. I'm not sure people have the same need for article hosting - probably not in the example of internet forums, but maybe in other contexts. Of course, as you and other folks have pointed out, with an API this is much more interesting. And even without, it's still a really cool service. There's also this whole (I hesitate to use the word) "folksonomy" thing they have pulled off with their labels/attributes thingie. I'm sure that will make some people foam.

      --
      Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
    2. Re:Hosting Images and API's by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      A problem is that these services usually have limits on file sizes, or delete unaccessed files after a while, or don't accept unusal formats such as camera raw images. This means they are not very good for archiving original images. My experiments with Google base suggest that it also has an image file size limit: I tried to upload a 620k jpeg image and it was rejected with a vague error message.

  43. Disappointed by story headline by Zan+Lynx · · Score: 1

    Dammit. I read the headline and was all exciting about Google launching the Copernicus Moon Base.

    So disappointing.

  44. Somebody tell me by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I can't figure this out just from the info on the site, but is this the sort of thing that lets you search on attributes (AKA metadata)? If so, it's like an idea I started implementing a few years back, which (due to lack of time) never really materialized.

    The idea was that you could do things like: suppose you're looking for a PDA with certain features; say, a keyboard, no more than $ 200, and at least 320x240 screen size. Then you would go to the site, select the item type, and add constraints by selecting attributes from a list, then a relation on that attribute (e.g. equals, or greater than), and then select or enter a value. You would keep adding constraints until all of the ones important to you where there, and then click search.

    The idea was to let any interested party add information to the system; "many eyes" would make sure that it was mostly accurate. I wasn't really sure this would work, but Wikipedia later went and kind of proved the viability of it. In the meantime, I had gotten the user interface and database backend to a usable state, but lacked the time to add all sorts of item types, including sensible metadata, and enter some sample information to kick start the system.

    Nowadays, I just wait for Google to implement my ideas. :-)

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  45. Attributes by popularity by XNormal · · Score: 4, Interesting

    While the semantic web people are arguing forever about ontologies and schemas Google go ahead and implement a practical way of adding meaningful metadata which real people can actually use.

    Instead of having strict schemas which will never be quite right you can just add whatever attribute you like and see which attributes are popular for the type of entity you are entering.

    --
    Stop worrying about the risks of nuclear power and start worrying about the risks of not using nuclear power.
  46. So.. the Google Base is.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So.. the Google Base is.. Goog Al Qaeda?

  47. Semantic web, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    In five years, Google will sell you CPU time to run your algorithms on their servers, connected to the largest well-organized database in the worlds, which updates itself in real-time from all over the world with RSS feeds.

    You first read it here :)

    1. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      And pay you for selling your CPU time, ad-words style.
      Think a global paralell computing network that is available for public use. 3D animation rendering software that takes less than a minute to render a fully-featured half-hour movie (for a small fee of course, paid by your employer, gfx studio), advanced programs sponsored by government, a small rural house with 30 PCs running 24/7 in the basement just to earn living for the redneck upstairs, computational grid like power grid encompassing whole world. And there will never be enough of CPU power and shortage of demand for it, because there will be DNA-engineering projects, more detailed simulations of the Earth, maybe finally some "real" AI, and many, many such.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    2. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by cakesy · · Score: 1

      Sun tried selling CPU power recently, with no takers.

    3. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by Vo0k · · Score: 1

      1) easy access 2) price 3) robustness, total cost.

      If it takes 4 weeks to sign the deal of $80.000 and write dedicated software that will finish the single-run computation on the cluster overnight, while running the same task on your own company computers using currently available software would take 3 weeks and for free, the choice is pretty obvious. But if you had an option that for $3 billed to your credit card or micropayments account you just upload the usual data of your work and have the result in 30 seconds instead of waiting overnight using domestic hardware, I think this could be reasonable.

      --
      Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
    4. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by BarryNorton · · Score: 1
      I'd love to understand what made you use that subject, because this precisely is not Semantic Web!

      There are no common ontologies (I can just add whatever concepts and attributes I like without any agreement or documentation) and no means for exposure (like RDF) of the marked-up data - it's all internal to their database and hidden behind an interface that doesn't go far beyond keyword search...

      Please tell me if I'm wrong...

    5. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by sickofthisshit · · Score: 1

      running the same task on your own company computers using currently available software would take 3 weeks and for free,

      It's unlikely to be truly free; much more likely is that your cost accounting system is defective. Computing infrastructure requires real money to keep in operation, from initial capital expense (reflected in depreciation), cost of the physical space, to ongoing support staff, repair work, electric power, cooling, etc. At the very least, running a 3 week job means that the system can't go down for maintenance purposes during that period.

      Sun presumably charges enough to cover these costs in their setting. Your internal systems should charge you enough to cover *your* true costs, or else money is being wasted on computer infrastructure. Sun's basic premise was that they could achieve economies of scale that make their costs lower than your costs.

      That said, commercial reality has to take into account that many accounting systems *are* defective in that groups are able to use resources without proper cost allocation, essentially being subsidized by some other part of the organization.

    6. Re:Semantic web, anyone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      using currently available software would take 3 weeks and for free
      Well, yes, that shouldn't be read literally. More, like, "buy a big pizza, get cola free", we all know it's not free, it's included in the price. Simply put, the company wouldn't pay any significant money for the computers running the computation as opposed to idling. (and of course the network can be taken down for maintenance, it will just delay the results more) And the cost would be vastly lower than same thing from SUN. That's where the following is wrong:

      Sun presumably charges enough to cover these costs in their setting. Your internal systems should charge you enough to cover *your* true costs, or else money is being wasted on computer infrastructure. Sun's basic premise was that they could achieve economies of scale that make their costs lower than your costs.

      Instead of feeding your admins, your management and your hardware base, you need to feed the aforementioned AND an army of SUN pros. The savings on not using hardware you already have aren't significant.
      So where's the possible profit? Answer: In single-run projects. If you don't have the domestic servers, just a bunch of client PCs where your developers create basic data, if you don't have several advanced admins, just two user support guys, and you need really heavy MIPS, and you know you'll need it once, or for a short time - say, projecting some huge building for a rare, exclusive contract, or making a movie using lots of CGI, or finishing your thesis, or whatever you will do once and likely won't repeat in a few years, then buying lots of hardware would be silly, not only you'd spend a lot, but also it would go unused afterwards, you'd need to get rid of it, sell it or something. So instead you lease CPU time on SUN cluster and get your work done, then shake hands with the manager and won't go back for another 5-10 years, if ever. When your alternative is first building a small company cluster for $300.000 in 2 months, then running your task on it using currently available software for 3 weeks and for "free", the $80.000 "lease from SUN" option sounds tempting.

  48. Google Beanie Babies? by adnonsense · · Score: 2, Funny

    A random search reveals a new aspect to Google's business operations: http://base.google.com/base/items?oid=152787692968 78035551

  49. The internet as we know it is over by speedplane · · Score: 1

    Who needs websites when all of the worlds information is nicely organized with meta information in a single database? How long do you think it'll be before google imports all of wikipedia? They're allready trying to import all books and tv shows. And once they get GooglePay hooked in, and everyone can buy and sell anyything through a google base type of interface... what will happen to amazon? Google is taking over the internet slowly but surely. If I were Gates, I'd be pissing in my pants.

    --
    Fast Federal Court and I.T.C. updates
  50. eBay Killer by Nehmo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I just tired it, and you can jump in too. The water is fine! No expiration, ten images, no charge, searchable via Google. eBay had a good run. The use is, of course, to sell and buy stuff. There are other applications, but they won't be the important ones at first.

    --
    (||) Nehmo (||)
    1. Re:eBay Killer by mithras+the+prophet · · Score: 1

      No feedback mechanism though, right? And nobody to go complain to when a seller (or buyer) fleeces you? Sounds like a haven for fraud, even worse than eBay...

      --
      four nine eighteen twenty-7 thirty-nine forty-7 fiftyeight sixty-nine seventy-9 eighty-8 one-hundred-and-nine one-twenty
    2. Re:eBay Killer by Nehmo · · Score: 1

      Print classified ads, and even regular ads didn't have eBay-style feedback etc. Anyway, at this point, if challanged on your reputation, you could refer customers to your old eBay profile.

      --
      (||) Nehmo (||)
  51. Whoops by Davey+McDave · · Score: 1

    Aw, I read that as "Google Bass" then. I knew something fishy was up.

    --
    I've got the spirit, lose the feeling.
    1. Re:Whoops by splinksplonksplank · · Score: 1

      boom boom?

  52. Spurs more procative protection of information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First time ever posting to /. :
    Despite all the criticism and ramifications this has on privacy concerns (as far as interally housed infromation on intranets etc.). I personaly think it's a good motivator for organzations to ensure that strionger measures are taken to protect information that is NOT intended to disseminated.

    I find it easy enough to find as much information as I want or need - even with my limited technical backround. Granted, as much is already out there for the picking of almost anyone who is willing to put enough effort into it. But by exposing this same information through such a visible and prominent medium as Google, wouldn't it be a benefit a greater majority to be aware of what others (possibly with potnential malicus intent) could so easily be aware of?

    Just my own alcohol-induced opinion anyway.

  53. hmm thats odd by sam_paris · · Score: 1

    Any notice that when you search for porn on google base it gives one of the results as a link to slashdot? http://base.google.com/base/search?q=porn&authorid =&hl=en

    1. Re:hmm thats odd by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about that 'german male seeking asian female?'

      Years from now, when people are talking about the origins of porn links on Google Base, he will be the remembered as the man that started it all.

  54. Anonymous reader? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

    We'll host the items and make them searchable for free." Emphasis mine. I might be reading too much into this, but I reckon they work with a company that rhymes with boogle. ;)

    --
    No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
    1. Re:Anonymous reader? by mlk · · Score: 1

      Or they copy and pasted.

      --
      Wow, I should not post when knackered.
    2. Re:Anonymous reader? by Sockatume · · Score: 1

      You're right, I thought it switched from third to first person partway through there, but it's actually first person throughout.

      --
      No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
  55. Google Talk by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

    ``Hmm... Things might get pretty interesting pretty fast once the API's are out.''

    Speaking of which...has Google already released the specifics of their Google Talk protocol?

    --
    Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
    1. Re:Google Talk by njyoder · · Score: 2, Informative

      Er, did you even bother reading their website? They use the Jabber protocol.

    2. Re:Google Talk by irc.goatse.cx+troll · · Score: 0, Troll

      With their own voicechat hacked on, and with server to server messaging turned off. It would be like if AIM went open by switching to IRC as their backend, but still released no specs as to how direct connections/file sharing/webcams/voice chat worked. Sounds open in theory, is worthless in practice. Google does nothing by using jabber. We can already use third party clients for all other IM systems, thats not where jabber means anything, where jabber is useful is in server to server messaging (as in, my friends and i on our local jabber server being able to message gtalk users.) Google doesn't allow this, and thus is pretty irrelivant in the jabber world, and already irrelivant in the IM world due to lack of features.

      --
      Pain lasts, kid. Its how you know you're alive. Sometimes I think this growing up thing is just pain management-TheMaxx
    3. Re:Google Talk by njyoder · · Score: 1

      That's nice, but you still didn't read their website:

      5. What protocols are used for voice calls?

      Google Talk supports a custom XMPP-based signaling protocol and peer-to-peer communication mechanism. We will fully document this protocol. In the near future, we plan to support SIP signaling.

      http://www.google.com/talk/developer.html

      You say Google does nothing by using Jabber, except they obviously do, by making it easier to write clients and requiring no reverse engineering. Although I suppose if you're an end user who doesn't give a shit what programmers have to go through, I suppose that's a valid argument, especially when companies like AOL deliberately try to alter the protocol to block alternative clients. Even with the extensions that weren't documented, it's XML based, it's not hard to figure out. Voice chat is more of a minor feature anyway, so you're really getting bent out of shape over nothing.

    4. Re:Google Talk by RAMMS+EIN · · Score: 1

      ``They use the Jabber protocol.''

      Yeah, for IM they do. But I meant the proprietary protocol they use for voice and video conferencing.

      --
      Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
  56. You are not the only one... by Wonderkid · · Score: 1

    I wrote a specification for something nearly identical to Google Base a few years ago. And our engineers are working on it. A form of universal database that blends symentic web concepts with AJAX. I am not sure if your project was just a hobby or not, but ours is a serious commercial venture. But where Google have pulled the rug from under everyone (Yahoo included) is in the fact their service is free. So, even if we come up with something better, we may not be able to charge for it.

    --

    O'WONDERWe're working on it.

  57. Re:...but for how long? by sunwolf · · Score: 3, Funny

    A stretch, but I like it. When do the Crusades start?

  58. searching google base? by kautilya · · Score: 1

    how does search algorithm work for content on base? They are not necessarily linked to each other!

  59. first flop! by kautilya · · Score: 1

    I am guessing this the first flop from google.

  60. why google has done this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Every time Google comes out with a new product, you people talk about how great it is and highlight the product as a category killer. However, it increasingly appears to me that Google is filling up holes in their offering, in an attempt to match its competitors so called yahoo ,MSN etc... Google does innovate in some spaces but has largely innovated in order to gain entry in markets that already existed. As a rule of thumb, they've been very smart at breathing new innovations in those markets. However, their competitors are generally quick to notice and are catching up. My Dec wishlist from "oo"(g"oo"gle +yah"oo") guys is : # An audio search engine, which will include a podcasting component (and possibly a podcast authoring component via blogger) # A strategic partnership with Wikipedia or some other encyclopedia # Some type of clustered search offering # A calendar product, which will probably inject new life in that space # An auction offering, tied with an internal payment system this will make these guys own the whole web ....lol

  61. Re:...but for how long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perfect!
    The question is, will G, like God, be homogenized to the point that the authentic experience (the authentic Tikka Masala) gets absolutely buried by compromises made to mass produce the religion. There are more recipes out there than I care to search, more inane religious ceremonies and false prophets than I care to wade through. I suppose I feel Google's quality metric, the referencing thing, may not suffice to meet MY personal needs. ...just like Religion with a capital R.

  62. Match.com = match.gone? by blankoboy · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is this the beginning of the end for internet dating companies?

  63. API + CC by shomon2 · · Score: 1

    Will it be possible to put creative commons stuff online and then refer to it from a web interface via the google API? And will it be possible to dump the entire database to flat file for offline use?

    I think the creative commons is easy to have - just an "license" attribute.

  64. Just automate the process... by vhogemann · · Score: 1

    Google alredy has nice APIs for Java, Perl, PHP and .NET. My bet is that someone eventualy will come up with a JDBC compatible interface, and start using GoogleDB as a traditional database engine just for the sake of doing it!

    I was already wondering uses for an online, searcheable, public avaliable database. And there are dozens... One for example is to make every post on my blog indexed by Google, an online store would benefect from this by posting their itens on the database, and get some eventually showing up on froogle.

    Imagine posting the CDDB database into GoogleDB... Or creating a free Thesaurus tool that can be updated online... Almost every site that offers some kind of free information can use GoogleDB!

    --
    ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
  65. technology being used? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Is Java powering this whole thing? Or is it like their support software written in Python?

  66. Frustrating by Bogtha · · Score: 1

    They could have done this already with their main index using normal HTML and microformats. Yet it seems Google aren't very keen on HTML at all. They don't write valid HTML for their websites, they don't use standard HTML links in GMail (making it impossible to, say, open an email in a new tab), they ignore HTML semantics when spidering websites (e.g. you can rank keywords appearing within <h1> elements as relatively more important than the rest of the page).

    It's true that HTML offers relatively little semantic information compared with domain-specific formats. However it does offer some useful information, and since HTML is a very flexible and extensible format, a hell of a lot more can be added with microformats, while staying compatible with all the other HTML software already in use. Why don't Google work with current formats instead of splitting things off this way?

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
  67. Everyone uploads .... by vijaykiran · · Score: 1

    and then it crashes!

    --
    Vijay Kiran
    I blog, therefore I am.
  68. Re:...but for how long? by Tim+C · · Score: 1

    They already have - witness the three way search engine war between Google, MSN and Yahoo! Okay, so no blood is being spilt, but it's definitely a fight.

  69. ebay killer? by dhart · · Score: 2, Interesting

    It's worth noting that Google Base, among other things, duplicates core ebay functionality (listings for sale of goods and services), free of charge, as is the Google way.

    Go Google!

  70. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by moonbender · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In theory, with all the editorial mistakes and dupes, that we all know and love, the only thing that's really holding everything together is the community.

    You make that sound as if it's a little thing. Slashdot is all about the community. If I want news (and I do), I read other sites - Ars, The Register, heise, and others (freshmeat comes to mind for the Linux geeks). If I wanted to know stuff even faster (and I don't), I guess I'd subscribe to a million blogs. Anyway, Slashdot certainly isn't about the news, it probably makes for one of the worst news outlets ever. But Slashdot has a one of a kind community. It's mostly just really, really large, which entails that there are a lot of idiots in there, but a few smart people, too, and usually a real expert on every issue. The news stuff is really just a way to make a substantial percentage of those people focus on a single issue. I think posting random computer-related topics from Wikipedia would accomplish much the same - and in all likelihood it would still be news more often, too. ;)

    Sorry for going on a wild tangent here, I sometimes feel like I have to justify why I'm still reading Slashdot after such a long time. ;)

    --
    Switch back to Slashdot's D1 system.
  71. Re:...but for how long? by yoyhed · · Score: 1

    And I suppose Sergey will be raping little boys soon?

    --
    WHO NEEDS SHIFT WHEN YOU HAVE CAPSLOCK/ DAMN1
  72. Netbased Synthetic Intelligence by n54 · · Score: 1

    "Google!" could possibly be the equivalence of a babys first spoken word for a netbased synthetic intelligence...

    Funny considering the origin of the name but think about other implications and consequences. And is it intentional? One might almost begin to think so.

    --
    this comment is provided "as is" and without any express or implied legibility or congruity [...]
  73. ebay killer? by gnalle · · Score: 1

    Note that Google base doesn't allow me to leave feedback on the seller. ebay and Amazon seem to have better fraud detection. After all online shopping is a matter of trust.

  74. Re:...but for how long? by Shawn+is+an+Asshole · · Score: 1

    it's 2:18 am.

    Your clock is slow. The post says 02:26AM. You should use NTP..

    --
    "It ain't a war against drugs.it's a war against personal freedom" --Bill Hicks
  75. Google Iris by cgrand · · Score: 1

    Google seems to give a stab at reinventing Lotus Notes/Domino.

  76. Re:...but for how long? by Baddas · · Score: 1

    Either that, or he's posting mysteriously from 8 minutes in the past!

    Perhaps he set a timer. Or, even more mysterious, perhaps he's travelling substantially slower than we are, thus putting him behind!

    On the other hand, his NTP might just be experiencing 480000ms lag. My condolences, I was on modem for a long time too.

  77. So this is not just meta-tagging? by Crayon+Kid · · Score: 1

    I was left with the impression that Google Base would only gather meta-information, to better describe web resources already indexed by Google.

    --
    i ate crayons when i was a kid and now i have two braincells and the blue ones taste nicer
  78. Re:...but for how long? by Paraplex · · Score: 1

    Power corrupts...

    It never requires corrupt people, but the very essense of power is a corrupting influence. This would happen even in a big organisation comprised of mahatma's

    Do no evil is all good and well, but lets just wait for the subpoenas (or what if the googlebot uncovers data in its searches or databases or e-mails that fits a definition of "suspicious activity"? is inaction an option for google in this instance?

  79. 'WTF' by slashmojo · · Score: 2, Insightful
    Just tried to create my own item type with it and entered a few random chars for the name.. 'sdfgsd' and it was rejected with 'misspelled: sdfgsd'

    So I tried again with another set of random chars with the same result.. so I thought wtf?! Its my item, I decide what it is called and how it should be spelled!

    So for fun I tried again with 'wtf' and strangely it was accepted and I was presented with a new screen titled 'wtf - edit item'

    'lol' is also accepted by 'lmao' is not..

    Well thats the extent of my scientific research so far on this issue.

  80. oops by slashmojo · · Score: 1

    damn.. I misspelled my random chars.. 'sdfgsd' does work 'adfgsd' doesnt.. where is the sense in this?

  81. Launch Google from Base by digitaldc · · Score: 1

    What's next??? A FREE Google operating system???????

    We can only dream :)

    --
    He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
  82. They set us up the bomb! by TheKnave · · Score: 0

    In Soviet Russia all your base... are fully searchable?

  83. Mod parent up! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What idiot modded that flaimbait?
    It answers the question with the answer shown right on the Google Base submission page!

  84. Obligatory... by StudlyDego73 · · Score: 1

    ...All your base are belong to us

  85. Nope. Google is the Arkwright of Information by Colin+Smith · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Go look Arkwright up (Industrial Revolution). They're changing everything.

    You see, people don't really want computers, they just want the services they provide.

    --
    Deleted
    1. Re:Nope. Google is the Arkwright of Information by somersault · · Score: 1

      in the same way that I dont want air, just the service it provides to my lungs.. or men dont really want women,just the services they provide? Heh.. you could say that about anything really

      --
      which is totally what she said
    2. Re:Nope. Google is the Arkwright of Information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want a woman for the services she provides, but aside from that want nothing to do with her then yes, you are correct. In fact, what I described is said to be the oldest profession.

      People want computers to provide a service, and then go away.

  86. Analytics still not reporting though by suedehed · · Score: 1

    It would be nice if they got one product to work FIRST, then launched another.

  87. Isn't this scary? by ecbpro · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You always have to think that nothing comes for free! Obviously google will want to use all the informations you store there. Do you really believe you can trust google and store your corporate informations on their servers. Google will start to know everything: Your search habits, your email contacts (via gmail) and now your favourite recipies. It's great for them, they can now make the perfect customer profiling out of all the data you store on their servers!
    As people like to say: Trust is good, control is better

  88. Re:...but for how long? by somersault · · Score: 1

    Steve's come pretty close - what if his chair had hit someone? ;)

    --
    which is totally what she said
  89. Re:...but for how long? by somersault · · Score: 1

    wouldnt he have to be travelling really fast so that time slows down for him? Maybe he's been travelling in his warp capable craft and the clock hasnt accounted for the space-time effects of light-speed (or greater than light, teehee) travel. Or he's just floating around in space somewhere 8x60 light seconds away. Yus

    --
    which is totally what she said
  90. Using google base to promote ebay ads by busyboy · · Score: 1

    As far as google base competing with eBay or craigslist, what I want to know is... Whats to stop people from using both eBay *and* google base?

    I just went through a test run on google base, and all of this seems to work perfectly and not be against any rules. When you make a google base entry, you can choose to have anyone finding your listing in their search results be forwarded to the page of your choosing, containing information about your recipe/car part/job/interesting hangnail.

    As of now, you pay no fee for google base, and there is no framework that creates an obligation to buy or sell anything. So, after creating your eBay listing, what's to stop you from creating an identical google base listing, and then have it direct people to your eBay ad? A second free source of visitors!

    Sounds pretty good to me :D

  91. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by vhogemann · · Score: 1
    If they host everything, and it's better than all the websites that host their own info in order to run advertisements, then those websites will disappear with time.
    I don't think so. These sites can add up value to Google Base, acting as a frontend to it offering a nicer way to retrieve and store the data. And they'll gain lots of resources, instead of mantaining their own databases, they'll share one HUGE common database.

    Now, try to immagine a Wiki engine powered by Google Base. No matter where your site is, or how new it is, it will have access to hundreds, thousands of searcheable nodes!

    This Google Base can start a revolution on information sharing.

    --
    ---- You know how some doctors have the Messiah complex - they need to save the world? You've got the "Rubik's" complex
  92. Anyone remember bitlocker? by ffdixon · · Score: 1
    I was at Showcase 2001, a demo-like conference, which felt like the last internet conference before the bubble burst.

    Does anyone remember bitlocker that tried to do an on-line database?

    They went out of business, not enough revenues. But then, Google is looking to compliment their product offerings, not base their company around on-line database.

    I expect there will be a resurgence of on-line databases now that Google has announced their offering in this space. I'll bet that one year from now, Yahoo, AOL, and Amazon, will buy one of those companies for $$$ to keep up with Google. Regards,... Fred

    --
    Life is NP-Complete
  93. everybody wins if we can decentralize this by psbrogna · · Score: 1

    Certainly the right path as far as "global information repository" schema's go but it seems a bit risky to centralize the meta data. Can't we frankenstein together a universal distributed meta data db (ie. via the headless p2p protocol du jour) that points to where everything is on the web?

  94. I, for one, welcome our new google overlords.... by XMod · · Score: 1

    because all our base are yours.

  95. Censoring? by Khuffie · · Score: 2, Informative

    What if the article I wish to publish addresses the problem of child pornography? Guess what, when I tried posting said article, I got an error: "word not allowed: child pornography".

    1. Re:Censoring? by dogmatixpsych · · Score: 1

      Could can ask for a human to review your posting (ask for an exemption). On the front end it is much easier to "censor" out anything remotely related to child pornography (even if it is condemning it) rather than face the legal charges that would come for promoting or hosting or linking to child pornography. I mean, how easy would it be to post some child pornography posing as an anti-child pornography article?

    2. Re:Censoring? by Khuffie · · Score: 1

      Don't know, but thats what I ran into (i tried my hand at posting a gamespot article, which mentioned it in passing). I wonder how many other terms are censored though.

  96. Reinventing Lotus Notes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A huge database filled with documents and key-value pairs... it's... it's... Lotus Notes!

  97. I, for one, welcome our new google overlords.... by XMod · · Score: 1

    because all our base are belong to your.

  98. someone should say by kurtis25 · · Score: 1

    Someone should just say, "This is another way of organizing the world's data."
    Someone else should say, "of course not everyone will know how to use it, not everyone knows how to really use Google for a regular web search."
    Someone else should say, "Seems like a type of Blogger for a specific purpose or a message board without the option to reply."
    And finally someone else should say, "http://base.google.com/base/items?oid=15819617200 159561368/ that is the worst looking Chicken Tikka Masala I have ever seen."
    To which everyone will reply "how many Chicken Tikka Masala have you ever seen and what is a Chicken Tikka Masala??"

  99. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by Syre · · Score: 1

    Google has the example of recipes in their easy documentation, but google base doesn't really seem suited to this or any non-volatile use. All the data expires after 30 days. It looks as if you can restore it, but that isn't completely clear from the UI.

    If I were creating an online recipe database I surely wouldn't want it to expire every 30 days nor would I want to have to remember to go restore it every 30 days.

    No, it seems to me that this is what people in the financial community were saying it was -- an eBay killer in its first stages. It lets people list products and services for sale, for free, and encourages the purchase of adwords ads to promote the items.

    What will obviously happen is that 5000 people will list a similar item, then some of them will buy adwords ads to promote their listings. Most of those who do this will end up losing money because the adwords ads will cost more than they end up making on the product, but in the meantime Google will have made a bunch of cash.

    Then, a future version, after they get critical mass, will add user ratings, etc. and they'll end up being a major eBay competition. Then they'll probably offer a payment service and other ways to monetize the whole thing.

    They may also fork it (metaphorically speaking) and end up providing a categorized non-volatile or semi-volatile database for other item types (for example, controlling the volatility based on item type, number of accesses and user rating, etc.).

    But the big push here has to be to make money by evolving into an eBay killer.

  100. KillerApp by Chris+Pimlott · · Score: 1

    There used to be a nice price compare site called Killer App that was much like you describe. It was limited to computer hardware, mostly; not sure if they actually had PDAs (though it wouldn't have been out of place). But they did let you do similar things with monitors (size, try, resolution, etc), motherboards (socket, chipset), etc. I was sad to see it go, I haven't seen quite its equal.

    1. Re:KillerApp by onedotzero · · Score: 1

      Anything like this You can search on all kinds of extensive fields, which is rather handy. I don't know of a non-UK one though.

  101. Universal Index by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

    I hope that Yahoo and MSN and whomever don't start doing this. Then we will be back to the olden days of submitting pages to every search engine.

    Perhaps we need a standard. A protocol for submitting data to an index, and a central repository for those submissions. Web sites could submit to this index, then search engines could subscribe to it to build an index.

    1. Re:Universal Index by Itanshi · · Score: 1
    2. Re:Universal Index by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, DMOZ is not anything like this. DMOZ is an open directory. Not a back-end index with a standard API for attaching search engines. RTFA. RTFC.

  102. It doesn't seem like anybody's said it yet... by donaldlatif · · Score: 1

    All your base are belong to Google.

  103. Re:...but for how long? by WolfZombie · · Score: 1

    You think Google is bad now in their crusades? Just wait until Google and Wal-Mart go at it in the apocalypse!

    If the two ever merge, there will be enough power to overthrow national governments (Wal-Mart already overpowers local governments).

  104. Re:...but for how long? by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 1

    How long until we see some sort of Spanish Inquisition?

    --
    "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
  105. Jobs. by abulafia · · Score: 1
    No, it seems to me that this is what people in the financial community were saying it was -- an eBay killer in its first stages.

    Honestly, eBay may be in the targets, but I think it will attack Monster and CareerBuilder first. Think about the local search angle, and how you'd attack the (somewhat entrenched) recruiting market right now.

    --
    I forget what 8 was for.
    1. Re:Jobs. by VC · · Score: 1

      Career builder are already listing their jobs on google. Go figure.

  106. Everyone, all at once! by mclaincausey · · Score: 1

    "all your Base are belong to us."

    --
    (%i1) factor(777353);
    (%o1) 777353
  107. It is the Craiglists competitor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I don't know why I haven't seen someone pointing this out, but this is obviously a response to the popularity of Craiglists. I think it's a very smart move by Google.

  108. My first posting by frankcow · · Score: 1

    check it out, you may find it useful

  109. Now that is just really scary by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Google Friends"??

    That seals it for me.

    This is cult worship.

  110. Re:...but for how long? by uradu · · Score: 1

    > When do the Crusades start?

    6:30pm Thursday at Sergey's place. Don't forget your helmet and coconut shells. Brownies and gruel will be provided.

  111. Re:open the API, many sites suddenly become redund by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're forgetting that data isn't free---and nobody will just "give" it to google just for the fun of having them host it. Data is expensive.

    I'm pretty certain Yahoo pays a -ton- for their finance website data.

  112. When you are in the Comfy Chair by Bimo_Dude · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!

    --
    "Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
    1. Re:When you are in the Comfy Chair by Viper+Daimao · · Score: 1

      Actually, I did expect the Spanish Inquisition. Nice red uniform though.

      --
      "In the game of life, someone always has to lose. To me, if life were fair, that someone would always be Oklahoma." -DKR
    2. Re:When you are in the Comfy Chair by Bimo_Dude · · Score: 1

      Wait, wait, let's try this again...

      --
      "Teleporting Rodents with D-Cell Battery Displacement" theory -- IgnoramusMaximus (692000)
  113. All Your Base Are Mine (Literally!) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now...what happens when some stupid sod uploads his customer database, complete with billing information (e.g., credit card numbers and expiry dates)?

  114. It's similar to what I've thought before, but... by Inyu · · Score: 1

    ..but it's oriented to indexing real-life objects rather than abstract information, and has less rights to allow to see parts of the information to certain individuals (it's either all public or all private).

    Still, in it's principles, it's similar to this idea:
    http://www.halfbakery.com/idea/Profemaile

    Short description

    Imagine a simple website, where you could login, and then create your profile by creating custom fields (questions and answers). The answers could be anything from plain text to uploadable documents (photo, audio/video file, other kind of documents). In other words, you could simply ADD new fields of any type to your profile... Then, you could let prefered people and groups see the fields you prefer, you could also request fields from other people just by writing a question or using a question from another profile.

    End of Short description

  115. Re: All your (Base) souls belong to us by dantheman82 · · Score: 1

    Yes, it seems it's likely someone on /., a Masters degree in CS with too much time on his hands. Well, apparently, souls are now for sale on Google Base. His soul is apparently worth slightly more than 2 cents to him. The philosophical questions raised by such a sale are numerous (as the parent has mentioned), but I took the shortcut and reported it to Google Base as a nonsaleable item, and a misleading post at that. Interestingly, GOogle Base would be a great place to hook up with the baser sort...

    --
    This sig donated to Pater. Long live /.
  116. All your base are belong to us by jerk_kill_blue · · Score: 1

    it just has to be said: "all your base are belong to us"

    --
    -- i'm not paranoid. who told you that???
  117. How long until we have a Google Base FS? by Roscol · · Score: 1

    Seriously, how long do you think this will take?

    Also, this could become an excellent place for FreeDB/Gracenote type services. Once default schemas are agreed upon by general usage, this thing could really take off for this type of data.

    --
    Nothing to see here.
  118. Re:...but for how long? by KinkoBlast · · Score: 1

    I'm there! Oh, wait, food brownies. Never mind.

  119. google is spitting in their own bucket by bigjossey · · Score: 1

    The problem with them creating content (letting users post jobs, etc..) and providing a search is like them spitting in their own bucket. Google is selling keyword ads. Let say for jobs in chicago. Now I"m paying google 3$ for every click. At the same time google is now competing with me on my own turf by allowing job postings in Chicago. Google has now become my competitor. Why would I pay them 3$ for every click, I"m giving money to my competitor by supporting their services. The only way that this will work for google is that people will outway the benefits of these keywords ads ie that their keyword ads work. Imho I don't think the ROI pays off. I don't remember ever clicking on an ad link and then buying something. Therefore I believe google's stock is way over valued, and we are going to think of this era as the google bomb.

  120. When Beta ends, how much will it cost? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When will the Google subscriptions begin?

  121. Google Grid... by kyle90 · · Score: 1

    No references to Google Grid or Googlezon yet? Come on, people!

    --
    Real_men_don't_need_spacebars.
  122. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by gatzke · · Score: 2


    Exactly. Slashdot still has some level of humor and cutting edge technology. The news slant just helps focus the community around a topic. Nobody can really expect /. to have real news or real articles. Even the reviews are pretty sketchy. It is a nice list of current events with some expert comment (and idiot comments) as well as some humor periodically.

  123. Re:All your base are belong to us by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does this mean that all my base are belong to google?

  124. Re:...but for how long? by zippthorne · · Score: 1

    When microsoft invades yahoo.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!
  125. like craigs-list? by peter303 · · Score: 1

    Google Base seems very unstructured on the surface. It looks like you just throw some text out into cyberspace and it is immediately stored and indexed in the google search engine. I presume these texts could be anything like in want-ads: buy-sell, personals, announcements, discussions. This reminds me a free-form craigs-list.

    As with anything else in cyberspace, once its there, its probably there forever, and easily discoverable by google. So I'd be careful.

  126. did anybody notice google has DRM flavored search by museumpeace · · Score: 1

    on Nov 5, according to the Creative Commons site, Google started providing a search that let you find content filtered according to what rights/permissions are bound to the content.

    --
    SLASHDOT: news for people who can't concentrate on work or have no life at all and got tired of yelling back at the TV.
  127. personals in craigslist by peter303 · · Score: 1

    One of the most entertaining part of craigslist is to read the personals. It happens to free unlike most other services. And there are alias for semi-anonymonity.

  128. What of the metadata? by Uberdog · · Score: 1

    I think this is a wonderful idea to get the user to submit metadata, namely give them free storage and bandwidth. My concern with this, though, is that there will be no way for the general public to access that metadata once Google has it other than through a webpage (with or without Google ads on it) in an attempt to protect its interests. Others have discussed their excitement over the thought of an API to access Google Base, but I wonder if they would provide a 2-directional api. Sure, they'll eventually provide an API to submit information, but will they provide one to pull information out? Would that go against their interests, namely to sell ads? Perhaps they will, but limit the number of queries one API key can do, as they do with the other APIs?

  129. Craigslist? by Quixote · · Score: 1

    It would appear that this (GBase) is a direct competitor to Craigslist. Does this mean the end of CL? I hope not.

    1. Re:Craigslist? by blue1 · · Score: 1

      I'm just about to make a "M4W looking for Swinging Midgets to have a good time with" post. I guess I'll find out if it violates the Google Base TOS.

  130. Prelude to online selling? by ProfanityHead · · Score: 0

    Interesting. Upload descriptions of all the junk you want to sell next!
    ebay needs a worthy competitor.

  131. how do you upload non images? by Intangion · · Score: 0

    it says it accepts ANY TYPE OF DATA

    but theres no way to upload anything other than images..
    what if you have a HUGE MANUAL in pdf or something, you dont wanna have to past 5 megs of text into that stupid description box

    1. Re:how do you upload non images? by Intangion · · Score: 0

      oh fantastic, try uploading anything with formated code snipets (like tab indented C++ code, or perl scripts)...

      youll notice it gets rid of it

      the description field is useless for like 90% of the 'worlds data' why would they make such a broad claim if they are completely inept at handling it all

    2. Re:how do you upload non images? by sickofthisshit · · Score: 1

      The answer is to upload just the meta-data, possibly through their bulk-upload feature, including links to the actual data being hosted somewhere else.

      Presumably they are trying to avoid Google Base as a way to distribute viruses and such by restricting everything to plain text.

      I notice my attribute values cannot even include periods (I was trying to upload source code, using a "File Name" attribute of "README.txt"). In any case, the description has a 1k character limit.

  132. There's a bug in the terms of service by ahem · · Score: 1
    From the TOS:

    10. TERMINATION

    You may cancel your use of Google services and/or terminate this Terms of Service with or without cause at any time by providing notice to Google at [email address]; provided, however, that a terminated account may continue to exist for up to two business days before such cancellation takes effect.

    I guess they should check that all of their variable tags actually have values before publishing.

    --
    Not A Sig
  133. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

    If they host everything, and it's better than all the websites that host their own info in order to run advertisements, then those websites will disappear with time.

    The sites may disappear, but will the content?

    Or will content creators simply move from a model where they have to run all their own infrastructure to one where Google does it for them for free?

  134. Re:open the API, many sites suddenly become redund by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 1

    If those original database holders (data OEMs if you will) decide to plug in here, many of those sites just took a giant step toward redundancy.

    But the "data OEMs" don't WANT the middleman sites like Vehix.com or Orbitz.com to go away. Those are their paying customers.

    Data OEMs are B2B (business-to-business) companies. To migrate their offerings to Google Base would mean they'd have to become B2C (business-to-consumer) companies as well.

  135. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by khallow · · Score: 1

    Actually, the comments really help in determining whether the story is credible or in finding background information on the subject. It's a great supplement and the stories are often useful on their own.

  136. Re:Google Consolidating All Info For Advertising? by johansalk · · Score: 1

    Don't forget the jokes. That's what got me hooked on slashdot when I first did. I still mainly read it for the jokes.

  137. How sad that I still know the lines... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    Darl: Take off every 'GPL'. For great lawsuit.

  138. Is this the place by ninewands · · Score: 1

    for all the "al-Qaida means 'the base' in Arabic" and "All your base are belong to us" jokes?

  139. Re:...but for how long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    When do the Crusades start?

    As soon as the Muslims attack...

  140. Re: All your (Base) souls belong to us by drewzhrodague · · Score: 1

    THis would be a good buy, if I could search for all of the souls, and buy as many of them at one time as possible. I'd like to see a similar buying and selling ability for various types of commodities on Google Base, or I guess that would be Google Soul Stock Market.

    --
    Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
  141. or, in Arabic, "Google Qaeda" by JeffreyBreen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    hmm...

  142. Re:...but for how long? by Asm-Coder · · Score: 1

    I volunteer to bring Cookies! (capital "c")

  143. Re:...but for how long? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your impression of Catholicism is a tad skewed, my friend.

  144. Use ebay *and* google base to sell the same item! by busyboy · · Score: 1

    As far as google base competing with eBay or craigslist, what I want to know is... Whats to stop people from using both eBay *and* google base?

    I just went through a test run on google base, and all of this seems to work perfectly and not be against any rules. When you make a google base entry, you can choose to have anyone finding your listing in their search results be forwarded to the page of your choosing, containing information about your recipe/car part/job/interesting hangnail.

    As of now, you pay no fee for google base, and there is no framework that creates an obligation to buy or sell anything. So, after creating your eBay listing, what's to stop you from creating an identical google base listing, and then have it direct people to your eBay ad? A second free source of visitors!

    Sounds pretty good to me :D

  145. Scary? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    Is it me or does it seem like Google is average 1 new service/product every 2 months or so. This is a scary pace.

    Why is it scary? I think it's great. They have a corporate attitude of "Boy, that's a neat idea, Bob - why don't you see if you can make it work?" instead of "Shutup Bob - stop being a troublemaker."

    Sure some of them will fail, but Google will evolve a rich product set.

    Maybe if you're Microsoft it's scary, but I can't see who else should be scared.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)