They don't need to upload it all and they don't need to up load it instantly. They can get a bit of it at a time over a period of many months. Market research data is never 100% complete. They will just build up a better understanding of the data over time.
Plus a 200Gb disk isn't likely to be full, and even if it is, they can exclude obvious files like MP3's as no point in scanning them.
They just need files with some text in them?... and spread sheet docs etc... I'm not sure if they would be even interested in source code (although I suspect most programmers would be careful not to allow any kind of tool to have any kind of upload ability... assuming its even an automated tool... which is likely as its likely to be an extension of their search tool). So its most likely going to be reading non-technical peoples machines slowly over time.
Or Google "accidently" leaked information, to see what the reaction would be to it? If its good, then go for it. If its bad, well, just say we were only thinking about the idea.
I agree totally about the security ramifications. I find this Google news beyond belief, although its the next logical step from their search tool.
For a start, Google are not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They get something out of this. As they earn most of their money from advertising which is generated via data mining. Then its logical to see they intend to use data mining as part of this idea, which is a logical extension to their search tool. The search tool data retention was for months, now this is a permanent record of the ever evolving disk & file contents.
The power to use this data for data mining is extreme. It goes way beyond directed adverts, (and I already hate endless adverts wherever I walk or look!;) Although even with adverts they will be able to analyse people's patterns far more closely than any other company or even government has ever been able to do before. The results of their analysis will be hugely valuable to companies and even governments. They would pay serious money for just a fraction of the total marketing data Google will be able to build up over time.
And that's just considering one legal very above board use of this data.
Considering how paranoid some governments are, I find it hard to believe they would ever want to allow something like this. Unless they could also get a benefit from the technology?... I suspect some will and some won't.
The potential is vast to use this technology to do data mining in more specific ways, such as analysing text & spread sheet files to find the frequencies of patterns of companies referenced together etc... For example, just start simple and detect known company names and then finding patterns of reoccurring combinations of company names. e.g. does companies in country A, show a preference in industry B, to do business or show an interest with companies like C, D and E?... and that's before even considering how to get clever with the data mining.
e.g. Google Sales Person... "Our analysis of 10% of known companies in country A in industry B can be bought to help your country compete against country A. Why waste time and money with traditional old fashioned methods such as industrial espionage, when we can sell you the data now. Buy the results of our analysis to find out what companies you need to under cut and what companies you need to target with marketing to take business away from companies C, D and E"... and that's just for starters.
You don't need all the companies in a country to find common patterns and occurrences of words. No market research is ever 100% but they don't need to be. They are just looking for trends and info which can help bias the outcomes of marketing etc... They are bound to get accidental access to any number of companies. Plus some people take work home with them.
Google employ some of the smartest data mining employees in the world. The potential to abuse this information for profit by companies and even governments is vast. Worst still, if Google are allowed to get away with this, then other companies are going to see it as a green light to try the same business approach.
Google needs to be stopped. This makes Sony's rootkit look like a toy by comparison.
Budget = $207,000,000
Just the US box office takings are $216,326,425.
And that is before you add in the global box office takings.
And then, on top of that money, you have the DVD release still to come, which is going to most likely be at least $100M+ (which is nothing compared with top DVD sales, e.g. Shrek)
Overall, its easily going to earn way over $100M+
The problem here is that King Kong is a popular film. Its not an original film and its not an art film. Its a popular, action, popcorn etc.. style of film, for the masses.
Just because something is not high art, or to your liking, doesn't make it bad for everyone. I like art movies but I also really like films like that, and judging from the takings, I'm not alone.
Yeah I very much agree it will mostly likely be careless people, not knowing exactly what they are doing. (But the possibility to use the data at the Google end for crime (by one bad employee) is also another weak point that should not be forgotten).
However, yeah careless people and people not knowing what they are doing is shown by the people most likely to get virus infections etc.. where its been the least technical people who are the most likely to get the viruses. But the important point is that its also often high up people who are likely to get a virus (via opening an email attachment etc..).
So I would suspect the same kinds of people are most likely to use this Google tool unaware of what they are doing. So with people like some marketing departments and some bosses themselves being unaware of what they are doing; yet they most likely have full access to the entire company network and all marketing data etc. So the data leaks are likely to be very serious for some companies as it could easily be the most important data getting exposed to this tool.
First, you can leave out the sarcasm about how to use the internet (I'm a programmer with over 26 years of experience). Therefore in that time I have had to create many products for people who are NOT PROGRAMMERS.
Second, some machines come pre-installed with this Google search tool. Plus people do not read the instructions (e.g. RTFM!). So to them its simply a way to use the tool without knowing exactly how far and for what purposes the data can be used for, above and beyond their need simply to find something.
Third, you cannot assume ALL people know about data mining and how that can be uses to manipulate the searches they do on the internet.
Forth, you should read up on the work of people like Edward Bernays and how his work (and his uncle's work, Sigmund Freud), and the evolution of Edward Bernays marketing techniques have been used for decades to manipulate people. Google and data mining is just the next way of getting more info to use to market stuff. Plus many people (and yes, even some programmers) don't know how much of these psychoanalysis techniques are used by marketing companies against them. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
Thats ok for technically minded people. But as many people struggle to understand how to use a computer, then they are open to being exploited by this technology.
It is surprising that Google (or any company) would go as far as moving data to their servers.
It can only be a matter of time until companies like this one start legal action to go after Google. Surely this is opening Google up to any number of legal issues, not least of which even as far as claims of corporate espionage. Saying they are not going to look at the data and its encrypted so just trust us doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
Plus further down the line, as they earn so much of their current money from advertising, it must be tempting to use data mining techniques to do a bit of consumer research in the future. So what do we have to look forward to, from this technology?... Google earning more money from trying to manipulating people with more personalised and directed adverts... oh joy... I can't wait.
Ok, so in that case, can we delete all the articles over 999999 as I would like to add an article about deleting articles, although I guess it will get deleted... Err yeah... Medic!
I agree with you, although they could reduce the bandwidth problem depending on how higher level commands they are sending out from the central command.
Plus these robots have IR comms on them, so in theory they could be made to communicate with each other.
"Actually, no, it doesn't prove that. If DNA determines what the animal will look like and how its body functions, then similar animals will have similar DNA, whether they are in any way related or not."
Sorry but that is so profoundly ignorant of the facts about genetics. You may not (clearly do not) understand the science of genetics but you cannot deny that geneticists are able to alter plants and animals by manipulating the DNA because you can often see the results of their work with your own eyes. Also, you can see even more with microscopes etc.. (And once you have got as far as a microscope then try reading the actual science papers of their research). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics
e.g. "Genes are the units of heredity in living organisms. They are encoded in the organism's genetic material (usually DNA or RNA), and control the physical development and behaviour of the organism. During reproduction, the genetic material is passed on from the parent(s) to the offspring. Genetic material can also be passed between un-related individuals (e.g. via transfection, or on viruses). Genes encode the information necessary to construct the chemicals (proteins etc.) needed for the organism to function.
Science has actually proved that genes control the animals development and proved how parents pass on their genes.
And for example... "In biology, mutations are changes to the genetic material (usually DNA or RNA). Mutations can be caused by copying errors in the genetic material during cell division and by exposure to radiation, chemicals, or viruses, or can occur deliberately under cellular control during the processes such as meiosis or hypermutation" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation
So "Genes are the units of heredity in living organisms" and "mutations are changes to the genetic material" and "Mutations can be caused by copying errors"
Therefore mutations leading to the creatures offspring being altered. Also, this has been proved by many scientists with many experiments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_organism
Therefore, when we have variations of a creature then that variation may give an advantage to survival or a disadvantage. If its a disadvantage then unfortunately for that creature it will most likely get eaten by another creature.
However, if the variation (i.e. slight mutation) gives a slight advantage then it gives an slight increased chance of survival.
Now with many millions of generations each with millions of that type of creature per generation, then you have a lot of chances of small variations to be passed on.
Slashdot Mirror
"ever tried moving 3000+ gallons of dairy products"?
:)
Does that make you a Slashdot geek speak style cow farmer then?
In which case, using a wearable computer would be a bit difficuit during milking time.
Well, I guess its like the old saying, squirrels are rats with good PR.
"I program in raw machine code. It's a perfect fit for every job, every time!"
;)
And how is that "Hello World" Operating System coming along
They don't need to upload it all and they don't need to up load it instantly. They can get a bit of it at a time over a period of many months. Market research data is never 100% complete. They will just build up a better understanding of the data over time.
... and spread sheet docs etc... I'm not sure if they would be even interested in source code (although I suspect most programmers would be careful not to allow any kind of tool to have any kind of upload ability ... assuming its even an automated tool ... which is likely as its likely to be an extension of their search tool). So its most likely going to be reading non-technical peoples machines slowly over time.
Plus a 200Gb disk isn't likely to be full, and even if it is, they can exclude obvious files like MP3's as no point in scanning them.
They just need files with some text in them?
Or Google "accidently" leaked information, to see what the reaction would be to it? If its good, then go for it. If its bad, well, just say we were only thinking about the idea.
I agree totally about the security ramifications. I find this Google news beyond belief, although its the next logical step from their search tool.
;) Although even with adverts they will be able to analyse people's patterns far more closely than any other company or even government has ever been able to do before. The results of their analysis will be hugely valuable to companies and even governments. They would pay serious money for just a fraction of the total marketing data Google will be able to build up over time.
... I suspect some will and some won't.
... and that's before even considering how to get clever with the data mining.
... "Our analysis of 10% of known companies in country A in industry B can be bought to help your country compete against country A. Why waste time and money with traditional old fashioned methods such as industrial espionage, when we can sell you the data now. Buy the results of our analysis to find out what companies you need to under cut and what companies you need to target with marketing to take business away from companies C, D and E" ... and that's just for starters.
For a start, Google are not doing this out of the goodness of their hearts. They get something out of this. As they earn most of their money from advertising which is generated via data mining. Then its logical to see they intend to use data mining as part of this idea, which is a logical extension to their search tool. The search tool data retention was for months, now this is a permanent record of the ever evolving disk & file contents.
The power to use this data for data mining is extreme. It goes way beyond directed adverts, (and I already hate endless adverts wherever I walk or look!
And that's just considering one legal very above board use of this data.
Considering how paranoid some governments are, I find it hard to believe they would ever want to allow something like this. Unless they could also get a benefit from the technology?
The potential is vast to use this technology to do data mining in more specific ways, such as analysing text & spread sheet files to find the frequencies of patterns of companies referenced together etc... For example, just start simple and detect known company names and then finding patterns of reoccurring combinations of company names. e.g. does companies in country A, show a preference in industry B, to do business or show an interest with companies like C, D and E?
e.g. Google Sales Person
You don't need all the companies in a country to find common patterns and occurrences of words. No market research is ever 100% but they don't need to be. They are just looking for trends and info which can help bias the outcomes of marketing etc... They are bound to get accidental access to any number of companies. Plus some people take work home with them.
Google employ some of the smartest data mining employees in the world. The potential to abuse this information for profit by companies and even governments is vast. Worst still, if Google are allowed to get away with this, then other companies are going to see it as a green light to try the same business approach.
Google needs to be stopped. This makes Sony's rootkit look like a toy by comparison.
"Look at what happened with King Kong" ... "and nobody went to see it so the movie tanked" etc..
Sorry, but the facts don't add up to what you are saying.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0360717/business
Budget = $207,000,000
Just the US box office takings are $216,326,425.
And that is before you add in the global box office takings.
And then, on top of that money, you have the DVD release still to come, which is going to most likely be at least $100M+ (which is nothing compared with top DVD sales, e.g. Shrek)
Overall, its easily going to earn way over $100M+
The problem here is that King Kong is a popular film. Its not an original film and its not an art film. Its a popular, action, popcorn etc.. style of film, for the masses.
Just because something is not high art, or to your liking, doesn't make it bad for everyone. I like art movies but I also really like films like that, and judging from the takings, I'm not alone.
Yeah I very much agree it will mostly likely be careless people, not knowing exactly what they are doing. (But the possibility to use the data at the Google end for crime (by one bad employee) is also another weak point that should not be forgotten).
However, yeah careless people and people not knowing what they are doing is shown by the people most likely to get virus infections etc.. where its been the least technical people who are the most likely to get the viruses. But the important point is that its also often high up people who are likely to get a virus (via opening an email attachment etc..).
So I would suspect the same kinds of people are most likely to use this Google tool unaware of what they are doing. So with people like some marketing departments and some bosses themselves being unaware of what they are doing; yet they most likely have full access to the entire company network and all marketing data etc. So the data leaks are likely to be very serious for some companies as it could easily be the most important data getting exposed to this tool.
First, you can leave out the sarcasm about how to use the internet (I'm a programmer with over 26 years of experience). Therefore in that time I have had to create many products for people who are NOT PROGRAMMERS.
Second, some machines come pre-installed with this Google search tool. Plus people do not read the instructions (e.g. RTFM!). So to them its simply a way to use the tool without knowing exactly how far and for what purposes the data can be used for, above and beyond their need simply to find something.
Third, you cannot assume ALL people know about data mining and how that can be uses to manipulate the searches they do on the internet.
Forth, you should read up on the work of people like Edward Bernays and how his work (and his uncle's work, Sigmund Freud), and the evolution of Edward Bernays marketing techniques have been used for decades to manipulate people. Google and data mining is just the next way of getting more info to use to market stuff. Plus many people (and yes, even some programmers) don't know how much of these psychoanalysis techniques are used by marketing companies against them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_Bernays
Score:-1, Troll
Calling me a Troll for stating the truth is taking the piss, I was trying to help. Most people are not programmers.
yeah, or one crooked minded person within the company to exploit the data or sell it on. Its happened before at banks etc..
Thats ok for technically minded people. But as many people struggle to understand how to use a computer, then they are open to being exploited by this technology.
It is surprising that Google (or any company) would go as far as moving data to their servers.
... Google earning more money from trying to manipulating people with more personalised and directed adverts ... oh joy ... I can't wait.
It can only be a matter of time until companies like this one start legal action to go after Google. Surely this is opening Google up to any number of legal issues, not least of which even as far as claims of corporate espionage. Saying they are not going to look at the data and its encrypted so just trust us doesn't exactly inspire confidence.
Plus further down the line, as they earn so much of their current money from advertising, it must be tempting to use data mining techniques to do a bit of consumer research in the future. So what do we have to look forward to, from this technology?
Ok, so in that case, can we delete all the articles over 999999 as I would like to add an article about deleting articles, although I guess it will get deleted ... Err yeah ... Medic!
I agree with you, although they could reduce the bandwidth problem depending on how higher level commands they are sending out from the central command.
Plus these robots have IR comms on them, so in theory they could be made to communicate with each other.
They could also try using Windows but it would end up the size of a car. :)
More like mini Borg. "Resistance is futile ... or it would be, if I could reach up to assimilate your foot".
Just so you're aware, this Jurassic Beaver dates back to 164 million years ago.
:)
I doubt it survived that flood you were talking about.
"Actually, no, it doesn't prove that. If DNA determines what the animal will look like and how its body functions, then similar animals will have similar DNA, whether they are in any way related or not."
... "In biology, mutations are changes to the genetic material (usually DNA or RNA). Mutations can be caused by copying errors in the genetic material during cell division and by exposure to radiation, chemicals, or viruses, or can occur deliberately under cellular control during the processes such as meiosis or hypermutation"
Sorry but that is so profoundly ignorant of the facts about genetics. You may not (clearly do not) understand the science of genetics but you cannot deny that geneticists are able to alter plants and animals by manipulating the DNA because you can often see the results of their work with your own eyes. Also, you can see even more with microscopes etc.. (And once you have got as far as a microscope then try reading the actual science papers of their research).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene
e.g. "Genes are the units of heredity in living organisms. They are encoded in the organism's genetic material (usually DNA or RNA), and control the physical development and behaviour of the organism. During reproduction, the genetic material is passed on from the parent(s) to the offspring. Genetic material can also be passed between un-related individuals (e.g. via transfection, or on viruses). Genes encode the information necessary to construct the chemicals (proteins etc.) needed for the organism to function.
Science has actually proved that genes control the animals development and proved how parents pass on their genes.
And for example
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation
So "Genes are the units of heredity in living organisms" and "mutations are changes to the genetic material" and "Mutations can be caused by copying errors"
Therefore mutations leading to the creatures offspring being altered. Also, this has been proved by many scientists with many experiments.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model_organism
Therefore, when we have variations of a creature then that variation may give an advantage to survival or a disadvantage. If its a disadvantage then unfortunately for that creature it will most likely get eaten by another creature.
However, if the variation (i.e. slight mutation) gives a slight advantage then it gives an slight increased chance of survival.
Now with many millions of generations each with millions of that type of creature per generation, then you have a lot of chances of small variations to be passed on.
The study of DNA proves animals evolved from other animals. Entire family trees of animal evolution can and are being drawn up. For example look at the way dogs have evolved from Wolves.0 1/01/html/ft_20020101.1.html
:)
http://www7.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/data/2002/
And even wolves evolved from animals before them and so on, generation after generation for millions of years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eukaryote
ID is wrong, has always been wrong and will always remain wrong. Get over it.