Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.misc > #1689

Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works"

Show all headers | View raw

On 2014-03-16, greymausg <maus@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2014-03-16, Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> wrote:
>> On 2014-03-14, Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> wrote:
>>> On Fri, 14 Mar 2014 11:35:53 +0000, Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 14/03/14 10:56, Roger Blake wrote:
>>>>> On 2014-03-14, Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> wrote:
>>>>>> Bye bye google.
>>>>>
>>>>> And good riddance.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>You know of a better search engine? Because I'd like to try it.
>>>
>>>  TBH, with google being the way it is, you might as well use Bing. I
>>> suspect MS only decided they were in with a chance once google had
>>> broken their promise of "Do no evil" so long ago that even the
>>> consumers were noticing how shitty their search results had become
>>> from the pollution of crass commercialism actively being encouraged by
>>> google.
>>
>> At one time I could search for, say, a printer manual and get what I wanted
>> pretty quickly.  Then one day I tried and most of the results were prices
>> for the piece of hardware concerned, no manuals in sight.
>>
>> I, my employer or a client had already got the hardware concerned so prices
>> were totally useless as search results.
>>
>> It was about that time a hosting ISP started sending me Google vouchers
>> for 50-100 bucks at a time.  What was I going to do with those when all
>> I was running was a local resident's association site?
>>
>> Google had moved into the "pick and shovel" business.
>>
>
>
> Pity about the way Google has gone, I thought it was a progressive
>  company. Most enteties, when they get on top, concentrate on stopping
> innovation, which they see as a threat.
>

Yes.  I've worked for a couple of companies who were going somewhere until
they built their shiny new HQ.  At roughly that point everyone seemed to
take their minds off what made the company successful in the first place
and get involved in departmental empire building and office politics.

December 2010: Google Buys Giant New York Building for $1.9 Billion

<http://www.wired.com/business/2010/12/google-nyc/>

"The building’s previous owners, a consortium led by Taconic Investment
Partners, knew that proximity to the fiber-line would be attractive to
companies, so they tricked out the building with something called a
network-neutral “Meet-Me” room, which is literally a room filled with
networking equipment that allows the tenants to connect with each other —
and the fiber-line.

Thus, 111 Eighth Avenue has become known as one of the most important
so-called telecom carrier hotels on the Eastern seaboard, if not the
entire United States.

But of course, Google already knew that, which is why it moved into the
building in the first place in 2006. It’s also the reason that companies
like Verizon, Sprint, Level 3, WebMD, Nike, BarnesandNoble.com and ad
agency Deutsch are tenants."

-- 
Paul Sture

"In that case," said Napoleon, "let us wait twenty minutes; when the enemy
is making a false movement we must take good care not to interrupt him."

Back to comp.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

[CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" RS Wood  <rsw@therandymon.com> - 2014-03-13 09:08 +0000
  Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-13 22:51 -0700
    Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-03-14 09:56 +0000
      Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2014-03-14 10:56 +0000
        Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Tim Watts <tw_usenet@dionic.net> - 2014-03-14 11:35 +0000
          Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Morten Nygaard Åsnes <mnaasnes@gmail.com> - 2014-03-14 13:41 +0100
            Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-14 16:55 +0000
              Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-14 13:20 -0700
          Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-14 16:51 +0000
            Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-16 05:34 +0100
              Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" greymausg <maus@mail.com> - 2014-03-16 10:55 +0000
                Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-16 19:40 +0100
          Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Roger Blake <rogblake@iname.invalid> - 2014-03-15 20:24 +0000
        Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Paul Sture <nospam@sture.ch> - 2014-03-16 05:16 +0100
          Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Oregonian Haruspex <bob_davis_retired@yahoo.com> - 2014-03-17 16:54 -0700
      Re: [CM] "Encrypt everything" vs "advertising is how it works" Johny B Good <johnny-b-good@invalid.ntlworld.com> - 2014-03-14 16:38 +0000

csiph-web