According to our textbook (link here), about 65% of the search engine market is owned by Google. As is obvious for anyone that uses Google extensively, a lot of their services are intertwined. They use their applications to enhance their other applications and their search engine often directs their users to more Google services and applications. It helps keep uniformity for their users and is extremely beneficial. Their competitors however believe that there are antitrust implications and it could be considered a monopoly.
This comes off to me as a bit ridiculous, and even immature. These companies, including Microsoft, Yahoo, and AT&T, and major corporations and have been out-done by Google for years. I think it is a bit excessive to claim a monopoly because Google links its search results to its other applications. Not only does this actually benefit Google users, it is simply a good business practice. Now it might be obvious that I am a big advocate of Google's services. I love having all my information and applications intertwined. If Yahoo wants to do this with their Messenger, News, and E-mail applications, not only would I be fine with it, I would applaud them for being smart.
I believe that one company promoting their company is completely fine and expected. They are simply using a service that they provide, to promote their other services and enhance all of their users' overall experience.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Chinese Hackers Attack Gmail
In June 2011, Google Inc. and the government of China got into yet another verbal scuffle. It seems two US officials had their Gmail accounts hacked as well as Chinese political activists and other officials across southeast Asia. Google was able to track the origin of the attacks, and they came from Jinan, China which is actually the location of a large intelligence operation for the Chinese Army.
Upon learning this, Google made some implications that the attacks may have come from the government of China in an attempt to gain classified information. Google and China have been going back and forth for years because of disagreements about censorship. As discussed in an earlier post, China had Google censor some search results for many years until Google decided to quit doing so, saying they don't believe in internet censorship.
What is scary about the uptight relations between Google and China is the overall clout of both of them. We have the most populated country in the world, lead by a very controlling government going against one of the largest corporations in the last few years, based out of the USA, whom already has many people against them. Even though Google has nothing to do with our government, they certainly represent us and China is not afraid to include the USA in the arguments. So two of the most powerful countries in the world are jabbing at each other about the internet, even though our government is not involved. Hopefully Google can represent the USA well and this does not escalate into anything more serious.
Upon learning this, Google made some implications that the attacks may have come from the government of China in an attempt to gain classified information. Google and China have been going back and forth for years because of disagreements about censorship. As discussed in an earlier post, China had Google censor some search results for many years until Google decided to quit doing so, saying they don't believe in internet censorship.
What is scary about the uptight relations between Google and China is the overall clout of both of them. We have the most populated country in the world, lead by a very controlling government going against one of the largest corporations in the last few years, based out of the USA, whom already has many people against them. Even though Google has nothing to do with our government, they certainly represent us and China is not afraid to include the USA in the arguments. So two of the most powerful countries in the world are jabbing at each other about the internet, even though our government is not involved. Hopefully Google can represent the USA well and this does not escalate into anything more serious.
Google's Start-Up
Google Inc. has a very interesting story when it comes to their start-up as a company. Similar to Facebook, they originated in college, Stanford University. Two graduate students, Sergey Brin and Larry Page, were both in the computer science department at Stanford and interesting in the way different web pages linked to one another. With the internet and number of websites growing rapidly, they felt that it was a great topic to research further. With the help of a few of their professors, they were given a research grant and quickly developed the PageRank data search algorithm. Using Stanford's facities and equipment, they got an initial test-set of 24 million pages and used their data to write a research paper.
By 1998, they had received another $10,000 grant, updated their computers and servers, moved everything into a friend's garage, and changed the project name to Google Inc. Their algorithms and page design were both much better than existing search engines, so they were immediately successful and blown away by the success. Because they were still students at Stanford when they created the algorithm and were working with the school's equipment, the two of them reached a licensing agreement with their university for rights to the algorithm. The rest is history. They blew up in the following years, their investors made enormous amounts of money, and Stanford benefited hugely as well.
This is what is very interesting to me. Even though Google's algorithms were created entirely by these two students, Stanford continues to benefit immensely from it. 1/3 of the license fees for Google's patents go to the Computer Science Department and another 1/3 to the school of engineering. It is very interesting how schools can make so much money off of their students. Many classes at Penn State involved students taking a course and giving actual proposals to companies such as Geico. From what I understand, Geico pays Penn State fees to be able to use their students. So the students pay to go to the school, the school makes money from the company, and the company gets work from the students. The students also get very valuable work experience in many cases. The relationship between a school and their students' work is really interesting. It is understandable though that Stanford keeps making money off of Google because without Stanford, Google probably would never exist. That is tough to imagine. This link has some very interesting pictures and stats about the start-up of Google.
By 1998, they had received another $10,000 grant, updated their computers and servers, moved everything into a friend's garage, and changed the project name to Google Inc. Their algorithms and page design were both much better than existing search engines, so they were immediately successful and blown away by the success. Because they were still students at Stanford when they created the algorithm and were working with the school's equipment, the two of them reached a licensing agreement with their university for rights to the algorithm. The rest is history. They blew up in the following years, their investors made enormous amounts of money, and Stanford benefited hugely as well.
This is what is very interesting to me. Even though Google's algorithms were created entirely by these two students, Stanford continues to benefit immensely from it. 1/3 of the license fees for Google's patents go to the Computer Science Department and another 1/3 to the school of engineering. It is very interesting how schools can make so much money off of their students. Many classes at Penn State involved students taking a course and giving actual proposals to companies such as Geico. From what I understand, Geico pays Penn State fees to be able to use their students. So the students pay to go to the school, the school makes money from the company, and the company gets work from the students. The students also get very valuable work experience in many cases. The relationship between a school and their students' work is really interesting. It is understandable though that Stanford keeps making money off of Google because without Stanford, Google probably would never exist. That is tough to imagine. This link has some very interesting pictures and stats about the start-up of Google.
Google Book Project
Google officially began the Google Book Project in 2004, in an attempt to spread knowledge, information, and specifically books, the its users across the globe. They wished to scan thousands of books and put the digital copies on their website. They implemented a search feature so a user could search for a specific book and see if it was available. To complete this, Google got help from many Universities, including Harvard, Stanford, and University of Virginia. These colleges, along with the New York Public Library, provided Google the books as well as their facilities. By 2009, Google had scanned and uploaded full books in over 100 languages to users from 124 countries.
A pretty obvious problem with Google Book Project was its legality, in particular with copyright laws. After all, copying entire books was not too legal with the Copyright Act. At this point, about 16% of the books Google had scanned were already in the public domain and thus there weren't many issues as far as copyright laws. Another nine percent were not in the public domain and were still under copyright protection. In order to be able to make these available, Google found many of the copyright owners and made them legal. For the remaining 75% however, they were still under copyright law but the owners were nowhere to be found - either dead or non-existent as a company any more. To get around copyright laws with these, Google only uploaded small snippets of them.
I think what Google did with the Google Book Project is great. Everything we do nowadays can be done from home; people shop, watch TV, do research, and talk with friends all from their home and on their computer. Why not make books available as well? Now, I have tried to read a book on Google and it is pretty terrible. After maybe 15 minutes, it is a strain on the eyes and is no longer worth it. However, numerous times I have gone on and read a snippet or used a book for research. It is like a nice library in digital form.
It also seems as though Google did everything as properly as possible. Anytime copyright issues were brought up, they were happy to collaborate with copyright owners and libraries to get this project done. It seems their main goal was to provide their users with knowledge, information, and entertainment, and they have definitely done that.
A pretty obvious problem with Google Book Project was its legality, in particular with copyright laws. After all, copying entire books was not too legal with the Copyright Act. At this point, about 16% of the books Google had scanned were already in the public domain and thus there weren't many issues as far as copyright laws. Another nine percent were not in the public domain and were still under copyright protection. In order to be able to make these available, Google found many of the copyright owners and made them legal. For the remaining 75% however, they were still under copyright law but the owners were nowhere to be found - either dead or non-existent as a company any more. To get around copyright laws with these, Google only uploaded small snippets of them.
I think what Google did with the Google Book Project is great. Everything we do nowadays can be done from home; people shop, watch TV, do research, and talk with friends all from their home and on their computer. Why not make books available as well? Now, I have tried to read a book on Google and it is pretty terrible. After maybe 15 minutes, it is a strain on the eyes and is no longer worth it. However, numerous times I have gone on and read a snippet or used a book for research. It is like a nice library in digital form.
It also seems as though Google did everything as properly as possible. Anytime copyright issues were brought up, they were happy to collaborate with copyright owners and libraries to get this project done. It seems their main goal was to provide their users with knowledge, information, and entertainment, and they have definitely done that.
Google in China
Many people may or may not know about Google's situation in China. Basically, the government of China asked Google to sensor a number of words from its search engine in 2006, but only when being searched from China. Essentially, China did not want its citizens to be able to search certain terms and phrases that it deemed inappropriate. One of these phrases was "Tank Man," referring to the famous 1989 protests in Tiananmen Square. The government was using Google to control what the people did and did not have access to. Google reluctantly agreed and for a number of years, went through with this censorship, even though that is very strongly against Google's beliefs.
The owners and founders of Google have always been huge opponents of censoring the internet. They have even made public statements about keeping the internet uncensored, as is shown in this official Google blog. Finally, in 2010, Google stopped censoring the Chinese search results after Chinese citizens attempted to hack into them and gain information about politics and the military. The Chinese government was extremely unhappy and lashed back at them, attacking them publicly.
During the time that Google was censoring the Chinese search results however, the United States Congress was the one threatening Google. The Global Online Freedom Act was a bill that, even though it never became law, would make Google's actions in China illegal. So the United States was acting very strongly against censorship. While reading about this, I could not help but remember a bill that was being considered just over a month ago in the United States. That's right, SOPA and PIPA. If these bills were to be passed, the government would have been granted power to essentially censor the internet to its citizens. And again, although the bill was not passed, it was being seriously considered by a number of Congressmen. So just a few short years ago, our Congress was publicly against censorship, threatening to punish American companies that censored other countries, but this year, in 2012, all of the sudden a number of Congressmen legitimately thought it would be a good idea to impose these restriction on our own soil? Doesn't make much sense to me. I can't help think that maybe censorship isn't the real issue to them, they are just looking to flex their power and maybe make a few bucks.
The owners and founders of Google have always been huge opponents of censoring the internet. They have even made public statements about keeping the internet uncensored, as is shown in this official Google blog. Finally, in 2010, Google stopped censoring the Chinese search results after Chinese citizens attempted to hack into them and gain information about politics and the military. The Chinese government was extremely unhappy and lashed back at them, attacking them publicly.
During the time that Google was censoring the Chinese search results however, the United States Congress was the one threatening Google. The Global Online Freedom Act was a bill that, even though it never became law, would make Google's actions in China illegal. So the United States was acting very strongly against censorship. While reading about this, I could not help but remember a bill that was being considered just over a month ago in the United States. That's right, SOPA and PIPA. If these bills were to be passed, the government would have been granted power to essentially censor the internet to its citizens. And again, although the bill was not passed, it was being seriously considered by a number of Congressmen. So just a few short years ago, our Congress was publicly against censorship, threatening to punish American companies that censored other countries, but this year, in 2012, all of the sudden a number of Congressmen legitimately thought it would be a good idea to impose these restriction on our own soil? Doesn't make much sense to me. I can't help think that maybe censorship isn't the real issue to them, they are just looking to flex their power and maybe make a few bucks.
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Google AdWords
Since Google is essentially free to us, its users, how does it make so much money and remain profitable? The answer is Google AdWords. How it works and how to go about getting an advertisement can be found here. The way I understand it is that a company pays Google to have their link at the top of a Google search result. You can tell these are ads because they are usually the first few results, they have a shading around them, and it says "Ads" - easy enough to tell. Anyway, different ads will come up depending on what you search. If you are looking for a t-shirt, a t-shirt company's ad will come up. Each time you click on these ads and give the company a visitor to their site, Google charges them a certain amount of money. It could be up to $.50 per click, which seems like a lot if you ask me.
What I love about these ads is first of all, it allows Google to be free to the user. Second of all, Google makes it pretty clear these are advertisements with the different shading around them and the warnings they give. This makes it pretty easy for me to avoid them. Yes, I realize they might have some stuff I am interested in but I know that what I am actually looking for is in the links that Google returns based on its algorithm, not the ones they get paid to return. I am all for having Google be free, and I respect that these company's want to pay to have their links out there, but no way am I clicking on them.
Another thing Google does is monitor these clicks to make sure it is not spam. If the shoe company Finish Line wants to mess with their competitor Footlocker, they could have someone go out and click these AdWords links to make Footlocker pay Google. Google actively monitors the links to make sure this isn't happening which surprises me. They are going out of their way to make sure companies are not paying them too much money - seems way too fair to be the practice of a huge company like Google. So basically Google is providing us with an amazing service for free, they sure are making enough money for themselves, and the company's can get their names out through AdWords. Seems like a legitimate relationship with positives for all parties involved.
What I love about these ads is first of all, it allows Google to be free to the user. Second of all, Google makes it pretty clear these are advertisements with the different shading around them and the warnings they give. This makes it pretty easy for me to avoid them. Yes, I realize they might have some stuff I am interested in but I know that what I am actually looking for is in the links that Google returns based on its algorithm, not the ones they get paid to return. I am all for having Google be free, and I respect that these company's want to pay to have their links out there, but no way am I clicking on them.
Another thing Google does is monitor these clicks to make sure it is not spam. If the shoe company Finish Line wants to mess with their competitor Footlocker, they could have someone go out and click these AdWords links to make Footlocker pay Google. Google actively monitors the links to make sure this isn't happening which surprises me. They are going out of their way to make sure companies are not paying them too much money - seems way too fair to be the practice of a huge company like Google. So basically Google is providing us with an amazing service for free, they sure are making enough money for themselves, and the company's can get their names out through AdWords. Seems like a legitimate relationship with positives for all parties involved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)