These documents and subdocuments are so full of weasel words, Google could practically do anything they want. Example:
However, Google may only use health information you provide as permitted by the Google Health Privacy Policy, your Sharing Authorization, and applicable law.
"YOU did not provide this information. Your doctor's office provided the information, so it is exempt from these policies."
See? It took me just a quick glance to find a huge conditional that is subject to interpretation. Don't think that companies wouldn't make that argument. And Google does not have an "evil policy", so we don't have a "promise" that they'll not interpret things in a manner we didn't expect.
When you provide your information through Google Health, you give Google a license to use and distribute it in connection with Google Health and other Google services.
I'm waiting for someone to start defending with these gems:
"Your confidential information is and always will be secure and treated with respect." "The benefits of big databases are worth the risks." "Trust us."
Figure B: "SCREENSHOT OF ASKCALEA HELP DESK DATABASE"
It shows requests from: Montogmery County, MD Baltimore County (state not listed) Omaha branch of the FBI Kenner, Louisiana US Secret Service Racine (Wisconsin?) Taylorsville, Utah
Look at all of those small towns. Given that even the very small towns are using CALEA, it looks like the use of wiretaps is very widespread.
I wrote a longish reply about this (below). Sure, there is a component of this that is to augment microsoft's web based advertising. No question.
What is really the motivation for this transaction is that Microsoft got caught with its pants down in an emerging field. Again.
A new Internet is developing. (No, really. Hear this one out.) An Internet that is centered around your location (your GPS coordinates) and where you currently are, and what is around you. If the Internet, to date, brought you access to the world, then the next generation of Internet services will bring you access to your community (or will bring your community access to YOU!)
Think of all your data, all your requests, everything, but tagged with GPS coordinates. What fun services can you provide? GPS + Flickr = location and time based picture sharing. Went to a concert? Easily get photos from other people who attended the same event. See? Internet + GPS = fun.
Guess what also can be location based? Yup. Advertising. I won't get into the whole host of ideas here (online coupons, business search with advertising, favored search results, etc etc) but there is a great opportunity here. If people are currently using the Internet to market to the nation/world, then perhaps a different group of people will want to use the Internet to advertise to people in their own community.
For example, a mom-and-pop sandwich shop. Trying to find a good sub shop to go to for lunch? The mom-and-pop business can pay for favored search results. Perhaps dangle a digital coupon to entice your business. A completely different advertising customer and advertising model than we have today.
Microsoft totally has its pants down on the local Internet that is developing behind the scenes. Microsoft will be handing out the money all over the place to build the empire that they neglected to develop themselves. One that Google is totally dominating.... and it isn't even out there to the public... yet.
I wrote paragraph after paragraph here, but nobody will read it. So let me condense:
This deal IS and always WAS about search. But not so much today's search. Tomorrow's search. Microsoft is playing for a market that exist... yet.
Online service are going to get a new focus, which is based on mobile computing and GPS. Your GPS coordinates will become a very valuable piece of data in numerous new online services, and will add flavor to existing services.
This will open the door to what I call the "local Internet" or the "location-based Internet". If the Internet to date has brought people access to the nation or the world, the local Internet will bring people greater information/access in their own communities.
Google is so far ahead of everyone else in this field, it is laughable. They've been playing the game well in advance of everyone else. Microsoft has almost nothing. Yahoo appears to be the second place player (and I'd argue a distant second).
Microsoft needs to play catch-up in the field that they, once again, recognized too late. Acquisition.
So, the deal may have the blanket of "search", but the desire behind it is more specific than that. They are looking to get their foot in the door of the NEXT generation of Internet services, specifically, Local Internet search.
If you sourced that from a database somewhere, I'd love to access it.
I don't know the answer to this, but do you think they [Vz & T] are actually going to try to use all those frequencies on a next generation device, or will they stick to 700MHz or possibly 700MHz + 850MHz?
What I thought was interesting is that in some big markets, Verizon purchased some A block or B block, and in some cases, both. That's in addition to their C block. They're clearly looking to make sure that they're going to have a lot of available bandwidth.
NYC, Chicago, and LA, they ended up with A, B, and C block purchases. In some other large markets (Washington DC, Dallas, SanFran) they picked up either an A or a B in addition to their nationwide C block.
So they're certainly thinking about capacity and customer density for their future networks.
I kind of wonder, though, to what extent they've squeezed the amount of bandwidth that AT&T is going to have in those major cities. I don't have the details on their previous acquisitions to know for sure, but Verizon certainly took some potential capacity away from them.
You beat me to the punch. If our media wasn't so asleep and staying in the good graces of various groups for potential favors, rather than putting them in a position to defend themselves, maybe we'd get a little more truth in our news.
In the US, this would be an incredible level of journalism.
That's wacky. Try it yourself... In the search box type (without quotes) "emeter". If you type it with the quotes, that's different. What happens? You perform a search for "exeter"!
I'm sure it isn't anything sinister, though. A search for "cimputer" is changed into a search for "computer". But it sure is confusing.
The social aspect comes back into play, though. What do these numbers mean to humans?
5%? She's a snob. Or she doesn't describe her ideal mate well enough? Or she has been on vacation for a week? 95%? She's a slut. Or she answers every email because she is polite? Or she is trying to keep a good ratio?
What does 40% really tell me about someone, versus 60%?
The problem is that P in your P*V formula isn't a targeted enough metric to have enough meaning in terms of match making or dating.
Although I think I'm going to toy around with the idea a bit for other non-dating situations.
According to Play Meter magazine (the magazine for the arcade/amusement industry), the arcade industry took an even bigger dive in 2007 (from its long decline starting in 1984).
Family Entertainment Centers (FEC) locations were down 60% year-over-year. OUCH!
At the far end of the spectrum is a CIO who totally loves virtualization and believes that everything should be virtualized in order to increase ROI.
Will he take blame when his critical applications are more difficult to support, because he thought it would be a good idea to virtualize those, too? Will he make the connection when his MTTR goes up because of the added complexity he's created in the IT department?
I like how they painted all push-back as 'politics' with such a broad scope. Things are so much simpler when you try to operate a datacenter from 10,000ft, and are able to categorize the problems in ways that support your own decisions.
My own experience is that I'll have dreams that will repeat several times over the course of a year or two. When there is some sort of challenge, my first time may end in failure, but I end up doing much better my third or fourth time around.
It is very strange to repeat a dream, but it is very pleasant to do much better with it. So I think I do end up learning things in my dreams.
I think, in summary, the Internet of today is national. The next build-out of the Internet will be local, which goes hand-in-hand with locational. That's where all the new revenue, services, applications, etc are going to be.
Say, isn't Google trying to get information on every local business in every city, by paying people $10 each? They're so ahead of the game it is incredible.
Does Microsoft even have a foot in the door at this point?
PS / Disclaimer: I wish I could land a good job in this field (that doesn't exist yet), but as a System Administrator, I'm pretty much shut out in the cold as far as that kind of career goes. Luckily, I do work for a large enough company that assists and rewards the hoi polloi creating patents (for the company). I've started taking advantage of that. I feel a little shamed that I'm creating land mines for others to step on and not real services, though.
Idea new or not, someone is finally bringing it to life. (Which brings the topic of anti-trust and monopoly with advertising services into play. Google's going to have a near monopoly on it.)
Interesting tip on who holds a good patent portfolio, thanks. Qualcomm would have been in a great position to develop some of those.
60% of you will underestimate this. 20% of you will misunderstand this. 10% of you might believe it. 10% of you will totally get this.
The next step in 'Internet advertising' doesn't exist yet, and doesn't directly center around the web browser and web pages. There is a real integration of three technologies that is coming around the corner, and Google is far ahead of the game than any other player. In fact, most of the other players don't even know the game exists.
What is this magic combo? Cellular Data [real time, anyplace, data transport to a computing device] + Internet [not web pages, but providers of location based services (Google)] + GPS [one of the new key data fields that everything will hinge upon]
"But we already have those things today!" "This is nothing new!" "My phone currently does all three!"
Yes. Those are three discrete services that your phone may have. But are they INTEGRATED?
New world example:
You're hungry. You want a place to eat. You go to your [smart device]. It could be a cell phone. It could be a Nokia N800 like device. Yes, it could be built into your car like your existing GPS mapping device. It already knows where you are (and shows your position on the default screen). You query (not through a web browser, but an integrated interface) for a nearby fast food restaurant. With me so far? You didn't go to a web page Yahoo! Local or Google Maps. Your map application was built into the device.
Quite a number of nearby locations pop up on your map. But there are a few bolded map selections. Arby's has free desert with any meal purchase. Bill & Ruth's sub shop has a discount of $1 towards any sandwich. And some small pizza place you never heard of has a 2-for-1 special. And then there are quite a number of other choices.
How did those bolded deals get there? Some large company built up the infrastructure required to run a service where any advertiser (major corporation or little mom-and-pop shops) could put in advertisements at a local level. They've got the transaction engine necessary to take and bill for advertisements. (That would be an existing online advertising company.) They've got the scale to do this on a nationwide (or even worldwide) basis. They've got a yellow pages database. They've got a way to deliver this to consumers.
Who has something like this today? The only things close that I've found are Yahoo! Local, and our friend Google.
Google doesn't have all the pieces yet. But they're assembling them. Adsense is going to start allowing location based advertising. (I wish I kept my reference for that.) They're working on an integrated delivery platform to get that to you (Gphone). They practically have all the pieces in place, and they're working towards the goal of making this happen.
Now, DoubleClick is a major online advertising company. They could be competition to Google in this future world. But, if Google absorbs DoubleClick before the market even exists, then they can avoid the whole monopoly issue. So Google isn't just playing for the here and now, but they're playing for the future in advertising. Nobody else (such as local telephone companies which maintain their own yellow pages) will be in a position to compete (because they lack everything needed to gather the ads nationwide, and they lack everything needed to present the ads, except for some ownership of the mobile devices). Which... of course... Google managed to take away their walled garden when it comes to the mobile devices allowed on the next generation wireless networks.
And Google totally has this figured out. Hello? Google Maps? Want to know what the business looks like that you're heading for? Google street view. Google is totally lining all of its ducks in a row to corner this new market.
Bid and win enough licenses to prevent the other players from being able to assemble a national network, without dealing with Google for the missing pieces. At which point they can negotiate their terms. Could be a play for long-term influence over the cellular industry in the US. Which would totally play into Google's long term strategy, since they are planning to push mobile specific services, advertising, etc.
That has been my own personal speculation as well:
1] These are practically a license to print money. Buy the spectrum, then license it out to third parties, and make money without a costly network build-out or much of any other activity, really. 2] Use the frequencies as leverage to get the people you license (for $$$) to use it to play ball on your terms.
The question I'm wondering is...
What would it cost if you wanted a good chance at winning ALL of the spectrum? And how many years would it take to break even on that investment?
I read just the PDF presentation with the rules, and it was absolutely crazy with minimum required bids, rounds, waivers, and everything else. What an extraordinarily complex procedure! Now I understand why Google hired some game theory experts on this!
I think Google will end up purchasing spectrum, but then sublicensing it out to others. Requires no additional build-out. I also have to think that Google is going to be the smartest about how they approach this auction. I'd love to see a post-mortem on the action!
I think this, as much as anything else, speaks volumes about who took over when SBC merged with AT&T. The SBC management and anti-consumer policies have been infecting AT&T ever since the merger. (Hell, I'm even viewing this from the outside, and I can see this.) Those SBC execs are not very nice people, IMHO. It is a shame that they have to go and ruin a good company.:(
Slashdot Mirror
These documents and subdocuments are so full of weasel words, Google could practically do anything they want. Example:
However, Google may only use health information you provide as permitted by the Google Health Privacy Policy, your Sharing Authorization, and applicable law.
"YOU did not provide this information. Your doctor's office provided the information, so it is exempt from these policies."
See? It took me just a quick glance to find a huge conditional that is subject to interpretation. Don't think that companies wouldn't make that argument. And Google does not have an "evil policy", so we don't have a "promise" that they'll not interpret things in a manner we didn't expect.
And that was just one example.
When you provide your information through Google Health, you give Google a license to use and distribute it in connection with Google Health and other Google services.
I'm waiting for someone to start defending with these gems:
"Your confidential information is and always will be secure and treated with respect."
"The benefits of big databases are worth the risks."
"Trust us."
Figure B: "SCREENSHOT OF ASKCALEA HELP DESK DATABASE"
It shows requests from:
Montogmery County, MD
Baltimore County (state not listed)
Omaha branch of the FBI
Kenner, Louisiana
US Secret Service
Racine (Wisconsin?)
Taylorsville, Utah
Look at all of those small towns. Given that even the very small towns are using CALEA, it looks like the use of wiretaps is very widespread.
I wrote a longish reply about this (below). Sure, there is a component of this that is to augment microsoft's web based advertising. No question.
What is really the motivation for this transaction is that Microsoft got caught with its pants down in an emerging field. Again.
A new Internet is developing. (No, really. Hear this one out.) An Internet that is centered around your location (your GPS coordinates) and where you currently are, and what is around you. If the Internet, to date, brought you access to the world, then the next generation of Internet services will bring you access to your community (or will bring your community access to YOU!)
Think of all your data, all your requests, everything, but tagged with GPS coordinates. What fun services can you provide? GPS + Flickr = location and time based picture sharing. Went to a concert? Easily get photos from other people who attended the same event. See? Internet + GPS = fun.
Guess what also can be location based? Yup. Advertising. I won't get into the whole host of ideas here (online coupons, business search with advertising, favored search results, etc etc) but there is a great opportunity here. If people are currently using the Internet to market to the nation/world, then perhaps a different group of people will want to use the Internet to advertise to people in their own community.
For example, a mom-and-pop sandwich shop. Trying to find a good sub shop to go to for lunch? The mom-and-pop business can pay for favored search results. Perhaps dangle a digital coupon to entice your business. A completely different advertising customer and advertising model than we have today.
Microsoft totally has its pants down on the local Internet that is developing behind the scenes. Microsoft will be handing out the money all over the place to build the empire that they neglected to develop themselves. One that Google is totally dominating.... and it isn't even out there to the public... yet.
I wrote paragraph after paragraph here, but nobody will read it. So let me condense:
This deal IS and always WAS about search. But not so much today's search. Tomorrow's search. Microsoft is playing for a market that exist... yet.
Online service are going to get a new focus, which is based on mobile computing and GPS. Your GPS coordinates will become a very valuable piece of data in numerous new online services, and will add flavor to existing services.
This will open the door to what I call the "local Internet" or the "location-based Internet". If the Internet to date has brought people access to the nation or the world, the local Internet will bring people greater information/access in their own communities.
Google is so far ahead of everyone else in this field, it is laughable. They've been playing the game well in advance of everyone else. Microsoft has almost nothing. Yahoo appears to be the second place player (and I'd argue a distant second).
Microsoft needs to play catch-up in the field that they, once again, recognized too late. Acquisition.
So, the deal may have the blanket of "search", but the desire behind it is more specific than that. They are looking to get their foot in the door of the NEXT generation of Internet services, specifically, Local Internet search.
If you sourced that from a database somewhere, I'd love to access it.
I don't know the answer to this, but do you think they [Vz & T] are actually going to try to use all those frequencies on a next generation device, or will they stick to 700MHz or possibly 700MHz + 850MHz?
What I thought was interesting is that in some big markets, Verizon purchased some A block or B block, and in some cases, both. That's in addition to their C block. They're clearly looking to make sure that they're going to have a lot of available bandwidth.
NYC, Chicago, and LA, they ended up with A, B, and C block purchases. In some other large markets (Washington DC, Dallas, SanFran) they picked up either an A or a B in addition to their nationwide C block.
So they're certainly thinking about capacity and customer density for their future networks.
I kind of wonder, though, to what extent they've squeezed the amount of bandwidth that AT&T is going to have in those major cities. I don't have the details on their previous acquisitions to know for sure, but Verizon certainly took some potential capacity away from them.
You beat me to the punch. If our media wasn't so asleep and staying in the good graces of various groups for potential favors, rather than putting them in a position to defend themselves, maybe we'd get a little more truth in our news.
In the US, this would be an incredible level of journalism.
That's wacky. Try it yourself...
In the search box type (without quotes) "emeter". If you type it with the quotes, that's different.
What happens? You perform a search for "exeter"!
I'm sure it isn't anything sinister, though. A search for "cimputer" is changed into a search for "computer". But it sure is confusing.
The social aspect comes back into play, though.
What do these numbers mean to humans?
5%? She's a snob. Or she doesn't describe her ideal mate well enough? Or she has been on vacation for a week?
95%? She's a slut. Or she answers every email because she is polite? Or she is trying to keep a good ratio?
What does 40% really tell me about someone, versus 60%?
The problem is that P in your P*V formula isn't a targeted enough metric to have enough meaning in terms of match making or dating.
Although I think I'm going to toy around with the idea a bit for other non-dating situations.
According to Play Meter magazine (the magazine for the arcade/amusement industry), the arcade industry took an even bigger dive in 2007 (from its long decline starting in 1984).
Family Entertainment Centers (FEC) locations were down 60% year-over-year. OUCH!
The rerouted traffic must be a boon for Western intelligence agencies, who would have some completely new feeds to peer in on for the first time, yes?
At the far end of the spectrum is a CIO who totally loves virtualization and believes that everything should be virtualized in order to increase ROI.
Will he take blame when his critical applications are more difficult to support, because he thought it would be a good idea to virtualize those, too? Will he make the connection when his MTTR goes up because of the added complexity he's created in the IT department?
I like how they painted all push-back as 'politics' with such a broad scope. Things are so much simpler when you try to operate a datacenter from 10,000ft, and are able to categorize the problems in ways that support your own decisions.
My own experience is that I'll have dreams that will repeat several times over the course of a year or two. When there is some sort of challenge, my first time may end in failure, but I end up doing much better my third or fourth time around.
It is very strange to repeat a dream, but it is very pleasant to do much better with it. So I think I do end up learning things in my dreams.
Is anyone else, like me, totally ashamed that they got the (deceased) Senator Vreenak reference, without having to look it up?
I like your observations.
I think, in summary, the Internet of today is national. The next build-out of the Internet will be local, which goes hand-in-hand with locational. That's where all the new revenue, services, applications, etc are going to be.
Say, isn't Google trying to get information on every local business in every city, by paying people $10 each? They're so ahead of the game it is incredible.
Does Microsoft even have a foot in the door at this point?
PS / Disclaimer: I wish I could land a good job in this field (that doesn't exist yet), but as a System Administrator, I'm pretty much shut out in the cold as far as that kind of career goes. Luckily, I do work for a large enough company that assists and rewards the hoi polloi creating patents (for the company). I've started taking advantage of that. I feel a little shamed that I'm creating land mines for others to step on and not real services, though.
I think the number one feature Americans need is instant access to their cash in a secure way.
:)
Your phone will have Google Checkout.
Idea new or not, someone is finally bringing it to life. (Which brings the topic of anti-trust and monopoly with advertising services into play. Google's going to have a near monopoly on it.)
Interesting tip on who holds a good patent portfolio, thanks. Qualcomm would have been in a great position to develop some of those.
60% of you will underestimate this.
20% of you will misunderstand this.
10% of you might believe it.
10% of you will totally get this.
The next step in 'Internet advertising' doesn't exist yet, and doesn't directly center around the web browser and web pages. There is a real integration of three technologies that is coming around the corner, and Google is far ahead of the game than any other player. In fact, most of the other players don't even know the game exists.
What is this magic combo?
Cellular Data [real time, anyplace, data transport to a computing device] +
Internet [not web pages, but providers of location based services (Google)] +
GPS [one of the new key data fields that everything will hinge upon]
"But we already have those things today!" "This is nothing new!" "My phone currently does all three!"
Yes. Those are three discrete services that your phone may have. But are they INTEGRATED?
New world example:
You're hungry. You want a place to eat. You go to your [smart device]. It could be a cell phone. It could be a Nokia N800 like device. Yes, it could be built into your car like your existing GPS mapping device. It already knows where you are (and shows your position on the default screen). You query (not through a web browser, but an integrated interface) for a nearby fast food restaurant. With me so far? You didn't go to a web page Yahoo! Local or Google Maps. Your map application was built into the device.
Quite a number of nearby locations pop up on your map. But there are a few bolded map selections. Arby's has free desert with any meal purchase. Bill & Ruth's sub shop has a discount of $1 towards any sandwich. And some small pizza place you never heard of has a 2-for-1 special. And then there are quite a number of other choices.
How did those bolded deals get there? Some large company built up the infrastructure required to run a service where any advertiser (major corporation or little mom-and-pop shops) could put in advertisements at a local level. They've got the transaction engine necessary to take and bill for advertisements. (That would be an existing online advertising company.) They've got the scale to do this on a nationwide (or even worldwide) basis. They've got a yellow pages database. They've got a way to deliver this to consumers.
Who has something like this today? The only things close that I've found are Yahoo! Local, and our friend Google.
Google doesn't have all the pieces yet. But they're assembling them. Adsense is going to start allowing location based advertising. (I wish I kept my reference for that.) They're working on an integrated delivery platform to get that to you (Gphone). They practically have all the pieces in place, and they're working towards the goal of making this happen.
Now, DoubleClick is a major online advertising company. They could be competition to Google in this future world. But, if Google absorbs DoubleClick before the market even exists, then they can avoid the whole monopoly issue. So Google isn't just playing for the here and now, but they're playing for the future in advertising. Nobody else (such as local telephone companies which maintain their own yellow pages) will be in a position to compete (because they lack everything needed to gather the ads nationwide, and they lack everything needed to present the ads, except for some ownership of the mobile devices). Which... of course... Google managed to take away their walled garden when it comes to the mobile devices allowed on the next generation wireless networks.
And Google totally has this figured out. Hello? Google Maps? Want to know what the business looks like that you're heading for? Google street view. Google is totally lining all of its ducks in a row to corner this new market.
DoubleClick
Or another strategy...
Bid and win enough licenses to prevent the other players from being able to assemble a national network, without dealing with Google for the missing pieces. At which point they can negotiate their terms. Could be a play for long-term influence over the cellular industry in the US. Which would totally play into Google's long term strategy, since they are planning to push mobile specific services, advertising, etc.
That has been my own personal speculation as well:
1] These are practically a license to print money. Buy the spectrum, then license it out to third parties, and make money without a costly network build-out or much of any other activity, really.
2] Use the frequencies as leverage to get the people you license (for $$$) to use it to play ball on your terms.
The question I'm wondering is...
What would it cost if you wanted a good chance at winning ALL of the spectrum? And how many years would it take to break even on that investment?
I looked at section 3-4 and say that every reference to MPs was replace with guards.
Q: Does this mean that security services can now get involved, like Blackwater?
I read just the PDF presentation with the rules, and it was absolutely crazy with minimum required bids, rounds, waivers, and everything else. What an extraordinarily complex procedure! Now I understand why Google hired some game theory experts on this!
I think Google will end up purchasing spectrum, but then sublicensing it out to others. Requires no additional build-out. I also have to think that Google is going to be the smartest about how they approach this auction. I'd love to see a post-mortem on the action!
I think this, as much as anything else, speaks volumes about who took over when SBC merged with AT&T. The SBC management and anti-consumer policies have been infecting AT&T ever since the merger. (Hell, I'm even viewing this from the outside, and I can see this.) Those SBC execs are not very nice people, IMHO. It is a shame that they have to go and ruin a good company. :(