Slashdot Mirror
Google Re-Opens Analytics Service as Invite-Only
taboguilla writes "As of January 11, after freezing the Google Analytics new user subscriptions shortly after it first started, Google's snazzy web site hit counter is adding new users on an invitation-only basis. If you would like an invitation, you can submit your email address to on the Google Analytics home page and wait until they decide you are worthy."
It always helps when you explain what you are talking about?
but can someone please explain why Google is so big on the "invite only" idea. Isn't Gmail technically "invite only" right now - and everyone and their dog has an account there.
LINUX ONLINE POKER: Linux Poker
It seems like Google must be doing some sort of datamining on all the data its aquired through searches, sitemaps, email, and now a "hit counter." Is it really improving their results? I don't really think so because certain search terms are still marred by the typical commericial or SEO junk. I really think the next step for the search engines is to start work on creating a better way to index all those subject specific web forums on the internet that have massive amounts of good information but very poor searching capabilities.
Oh, if you have an invite send one my way so I can check this out for myself... is300fan "at" hotmail.com Thanks
So, on top of its highly successful search and adsense, Google now wants to be the next DoubleClick. Well that's fine and I suppose that a lot of web monkeys want to have detailed statistics about their site. But, what is the deal with aggressive and forceful statistic collection? I'm speaking generally and not specifically about Google here.
I've noticed a marked increase in the use of Flash to track users. I've also noticed an annoying trend of scripts that request or post information to a tracker site every second. If you leave the page open it constantly hits the tracking site.
I find all this to be highly offensive. Web monkeys can slice and dice their logs in any way the like but stop trying to hijack my machine in persistent attempts to track my page viewing down to the second! When I come to your site, I want to view your site! I do not want your site causing my machine to load Google, DoubleClick, OLN or anyother pages. It's rude! It's dirty! It's like porn site popups! It makes me not want to come back to your site or your company. Ever!
Everyone who is anti-Google complains about how Google should stop trying new things and stick to what they're good at. The thing about Google is that they're not really "good" at anything -- they're great at finding new markets by continuously pushing the envelope of need.
I love the Analytics idea, and I hope I get chosen. Web site performance is one of the most complex dances I've ever seen, and I believe Google may be one of a very select few companies with a group of minds that can properly understand what we think is just a simple hit count.
I'm anti-stock market, and I believe the Google is way overvalued (more realistic would be 10 times earnings and even that is too much without a reasonable dividend), but I think they have the talent pool needed to finally move beyond the desktop, the operating system and the hardware. Whoever said that information was the PC was right -- but it isn't just access to information that makes it have any value. You need to be able to aggregate, sort and display that information in an understand fashion. The hit counter is one of the most important (and overlooked) piece of information when it comes to understanding how to make your website more valuable to your users and to your investors.
it fails to count most traffic for no apparent reason.
it requires javascript turned on, in the visitor's browser. That skips from 5% to 30% of visitors (depending on the nature of your website - ie, homepage of links versus windoze wares site).
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
I've been lucky to jump early on the analytics bandwagon. However it got very apparent that they are having some performance issues and the report generation was/is still very slow. That said I still like it very much as it gave me some nice data on where my visitors live.
However the thing that goes on my nerves is that now everybody has it including big names like slashdot, sourceforge, ati, etc. I wonder, if the service is free, shouldn't at least peple that make a lot of money from ads (slashdot, sourceforge, ati...) donate a percentage to the analytics service so that it doesn't interrupt/cripple the service for the rest of users.
Analytics in the end helps sites target better their content, thus making more revenue both for the site and google (if they use GoogleAd's), but what if they don't use GoogleAd's? What if google doesn't beef up or scale better analytics with that revenue? That will just cripple the benefit that this service brings.
There are some rough edges (availability and best with Internet Explorer [yuck]) but I use their service to track my main web site, my blog, and three J2EE-based web portals. I never thought that I needed the kind of user location and navigation information that Analytics provides, but now that I have access to this information I would not like to lose it! Knowing statistically how people navigate around your site gives you a better idea of what people like than simple web log statistics. For example, I give away all sorts of hopefully useful stuff on my main site, but to be honest, I am most keenly interested in people visiting my consulting services page. Analytics lets me see what site navigation paths lead to my consulting page.
BTW, Slashdot has been using this for a while ... if you have any doubt, do a view source and look about 20 lines down. Since they already have access to the raw log files (argueably better data), the tin-foil hat crowd shouldn't be too worried about this WRT /. ... but it is pretty interesting that web sites are (basically) allowing Google to collect (and potentially view) this data for them.
Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
Am I the only person who sees danger here? I've never heard it mentioned before, but Google gradually amassing the ability to track your every movement on the web.
Now, web servers have long been capable of logging every move that you make ON THEIR SERVER, but once you go to another server, they lose you. What Google is doing is (intentionally or not) bugging millions of web pages with Javascripts which are loaded from their own server.
For those who don't understand web technology, every time a resource is loaded from a server, your browser tells that server who you are (IP and any applicable cookies) and also what page sent you to fetch this resource (referer header). So, every time your browser loads an "Ads By Gooooooooogle" advertisement script, or a creative usage of the Google Maps API, or now a "Google Analytics" image/script; your browser checks in with Google's server and says "Hi! I'm browser #2j823 and I've just visited this URL."
As more Google resources are dumped onto web pages by enthusiastic webmasters, their "surveillance coverage" of the web grows, and, even now, it's considerable enough to give a good outline of each user's general habits and usual haunts.
So, Slashdot, is it a good thing that a private company is taking on an ability that would be terribly controversial for the government to take on; especially when the government is just a phone call away from requisitioning that data?
You can run but you can't hide, except, apparently, along the Afghan-Pakistani border.
I don't know if anyone else has noticed but this is as good a place as any to throw out the question. I put my site on Google Analytics right after it was post on /. in November. I have also been using AdSense on the site since August or So. Oddly enough, shortly after adding Analytics to the site, AdSense revenue started dropping. Revenues are now less than half of what they were before Analytics.
Anyone else seen that behavior or is my site just a statistical outlier?
Slashdot is an anagram for Has Dolts, and I am Dolt number 468543
My Firefox tab says "Slashdot | Google Re-Opens Anal"
I agree, and I touched on this topic of Google's growing ownership of data and people seeming not to care about it here. It was more centered on the "google wifi" proposals in the news last fall, but the idea is the same. Many people really DON'T see any harm in it, or "so what, google should be rewarded for this" type of attitude. I've met very few people who understand the importance of how much control google will have over web metadata.
Will we see antitrust actions against google at some point? Maybe that's why they moved the analytics program to 'invite only' from 'free for all'? Imagine if MS had bought an industry leading application (urchin), rolled it in to the next Windows Update, and given it away for free. What would the reaction have been?
creation science book
But why? Urchin is to help a webmaster. Do you want to hurt the websites you visit? I can understanding blocking annoying features - I block tons of JS and flash and cookies, but why not run this script?
Sometimes the ad blocking crowd are a little overzealous.
I'm seeing my AdSense revenue increase after Analytics, and I've no reason to believe that the two things might be related at all. As before, I still see clicks worth really less, as well as those worth really more -- it's the number of clicks that has gone up, but the price per click is more or less the same as before Analytics.
I am amazed that the Googleaid-drinking Slashdot crowd isn't up in arms about this tracking possibility.
"What's different about "click stream analysis" than simply grabbing lists of requests from a given user out of the server logs?"
It's more "Web 2.0"!
http://www.welton.it/davidw/
Speak for yourself. Nobody's forcing you to block anything; in fact, the GP did not even say "OMG u h4v3 to block this now!!!111", he merely said "IF you want to block it, it's easy, as you just have to add the following filter to adblock". Whether people actually do that or not is up to them - not him, and not you either.
And as for "do you want to hurt the websites you visit", that's the same strawman that's used by those who're against any use of ad blocking whatsoever, too, but it's still a strawman. People's intention is not to hurt websites; it's to avoid getting tracked without their knowledge or consent, in ways that they cannot check or supervise even when they want to.
Besides, have you ever gone to the fridge to grab a can of soda or used the restroom while there was a commercial break on TV? If yes, then you should ask yourself the same thing - why do you hurt the channels you watch by not sitting there and taking notes about the products you're supposed to buy the next day?
Advertising is built on the idea that most people won't bother ignoring it, but that doesn't mean that there's something morally wrong with doing so. If someone says "hi, would you like a cookie?" and then, after I eat it, asks me to buy something or listen to him rant about religious or political matters or the like, I'm not obliged to do that just because he gave me a cookie - and if he gets pissy and said "but you took my cookie", I would just point it out to him that he chose to give it to me out of his own free will.
Advertising is the same. If you put up a website with advertising, don't expect people to feel obliged to look at it - and what's more, don't complain if they don't. If you absolutely want them to see it, don't let them in before sitting through it. Think that'll drive your visitors away? Tough luck, there's no constitutional right to having your business model work out.
And while most of the above was about advertising, the same goes for tracking and the like, too. Feel free to try, but don't tell me I'm under a moral obligation to let it happen - I'm not. And if you don't like me taking your free cookie without listening to you or signing your petition afterwards... don't offer free cookies.
quidquid latine dictum sit altum videtur.