Via Visual Economics, we learn Its Google’s planet — we just live on it:
>
http://www.visualeconomics.com/2010-02-03-planet-google-from-philosophies-to-market-shares/
Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor even implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
"Overall household indebtedness is up from $7 trillion to almost $10 trillion since 2000. On this sum, we estimate, the American consumer has an annual interest bill of more than $500 billion; a sum, by the way, that vastly exceeds his current income growth." —Kurt Richebacher
Knowing that the vote over the weekend in Greece was really a referendum on Euro membership, a majority of the Greek Parliament said yes to staying. European Finance Ministers meet again on Wednesday to solidify the 2nd bailout package for Greece at the same time hopefully a deal is consummated between Greece and its creditors this week. The Greek 14.5b euro bond that matures on March 20th is up by 2 pts. The optimism that all will be completed and contained AGAIN to Greece has yields lower in Portugal, Spain and Italy. The iTraxx Financial Index is also narrower by...
read more »
Tweet
Facebook
Reddit
Digg this!
February 7th, 2010 at 4:44 pm
Google is certainly one of the bright stars in America’s firmament. You would probably see similar results by plotting Cisco’s internet backbone market penetration, or Intel’s share of internet servers. These stories stimulate happy thoughts which help to balance the sinking feeling from viewing poor productivity of other sectors of our economy.
I have been thinking and reading about employment and productivity a lot these days, most recently with Minsky’s “Stabilizing an Unstable Economy”. The investments we make in education and information infrastructure seem to yield productivity multipliers that are so much higher than what we gain in other sectors of the economy, looking in particular at the legal and finance sectors. The inefficiency of the system in its current form is truly staggering, but we can look at the above chart about Google and realize that it doesn’t have to be that way.
February 7th, 2010 at 5:18 pm
You know, I remember a time when these new tech companies were dominating their industries. Producing breakout products, garnering unimaginable attention, and poised to be the most profitable companies ever.
Do people remember those companies in their heydays like Altavista? Geocities? Prodigy? Aol? Yahoo?
I remember when Cisco had become the most valuable company in the world by market cap.
February 7th, 2010 at 6:27 pm
What a triumph of the marketing department. All spin; few facts. Google has been a successful money-making machine, but let’s not forget what it really does: It is not a search company, it is a surveillance and data mining company. All the PR happy talk of this piece intentionally obscures the real point.
If a reader thinks that ubiquitous surveillance is fine, then to each his own. For the rest of us, we will remember that Google’s catchphrase of “don’t be evil” was misdirection from the start.
Do I think Google is evil? We will see. I bet the folks who came up with nuclear fission thought they were providing a useful service as well.
February 7th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
AT&T’s iPhone Mess
The iPhone has swamped AT&T’s data network and sparked a consumer rebellion.
“…AT&T has stumbled into a quagmire. When it secured exclusive rights to support Apple’s iPhone on its wireless network in June 2007, investors hailed the deal as a masterstroke. Here was stodgy, safe AT&T positioning itself to gulp profits from a cutting-edge technology. But AT&T and Apple vastly underestimated the iPhone’s appeal. At launch, Real Steve Jobs said he’d be happy if the device could grab 1% of the global cell-phone market, or about 10 million units for 2008. Instead, Apple has sold at least 42.4 million—25.1 million in 2009 alone, 14% of the global smartphone market. AT&T, which markets the iPhone in the U.S., simply can’t handle the traffic.
Making matters worse is the proliferation of “apps,” those bandwidth-sucking programs that make smartphones so much smarter. According to Apple, iPhone users have downloaded at least 140,000 different apps a total of 3 billion times. Watching broadcasts of Major League Baseball games and studying the globe via Google (GOOG) Earth on a palm-size device feels like a promise from the future, but the networks delivering all this data are still just catching up with the present. “We expected this was going to open up a new level of engagement, and we knew we’d be successful in the market,” says AT&T Operations President John Stankey. “We missed on our usage estimates.” Case in point: It’s not atypical, he says, for 80% of a college football crowd to be using their iPhones.
The rise of iPhone Nation—with its media-savvy and data-greedy citizenry—has left AT&T with a tough set of options. It could significantly upgrade its network to handle all the new demand, but that would cripple profits. It could charge more for network access or limit what customers can do on their phones, but that would enrage the all-you-can-eat subscriber base as well as Net Neutrality types who seek to prevent telecom companies from dictating customers’ options. It could permanently halt iPhone sales in overcrowded markets, but that would bring more mockery, not to mention place AT&T in the unusual position of denying consumers access to a product it doesn’t even make…”
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_07/b4166034389519.htm
GOOG, though, should pay attention to the, current, ‘cell-network’ limitations–namely, Backhaul..
If I were them, I’d light more of their ‘Dark Fiber’ assets, and go with VOIP–telephony over internet–via Wi-Fi & Wi-Max..
that is, of course, until people take this: “…The cell-phone industry funds lots of risk studies, and many of them show no effect from cell-phone-related radiation. The industry pointed to those favorable studies when countering Lai’s DNA findings. (In 2004, it should be pointed out, a European Union–funded study carried out by twelve research groups in seven countries found evidence of genotoxic effects resulting from cell-phone radiation—the same kind of DNA damage that Henry Lai uncovered in the 1990s.) But when Jerry Phillips, a scientist with the Veterans Administration whose work was funded by Motorola, replicated Lai’s findings, the company put him under so much pressure not to publish that Phillips abruptly quit microwave research altogether.
Industry-funded studies seem to reflect the result of corporate strong-arming. Lai reviewed 350 studies and found that about half showed bioeffects from EM radiation emitted by cell phones. But when he took into consideration the funding sources for those 350 studies, the results changed dramatically. Only 25 percent of the studies paid for by the industry showed effects, compared with 75 percent of those studies that were independently funded.
The cell-phone industry has managed to exert its influence in other ways, too. In the United States, the organization most influential in the government’s setting of standards for microwave exposure is the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), which bills itself as “a leading authority on areas ranging from aerospace systems, computers, and telecommunications to biomedical engineering, electric power, and consumer electronics.” According to Slesin, “The committees setting the EM safety levels at the IEEE historically have been dominated by representatives from the military, companies like Raytheon and GE, the telecom companies, and now the cell-phone industry. It is basically a Trojan horse for the private sector to dictate public policy.” The IEEE’s “safe limits” for microwave exposure are considerably higher than what they should be, says Allan Frey, who was a member of the organization in the ’70s. “When it comes to this matter, the IEEE is a charade,” Frey told me…”
http://www.gq.com/cars-gear/gear-and-gadgets/201002/warning-cell-phone-radiation?currentPage=3 becomes more ‘front-of-mind’ for ‘cell-phone’ (ab-)users..
~~
Toxic Sludge is Good For You: Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry by John C. Stauber
Trust Us We’re Experts: How Industry Manipulates Science and Gambles with Your Future by Sheldon Rampton
Propaganda by Edward L. Bernays
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/1567510604/ref=nosim/cryptogoncom-20
which, btw, nicely doubles Marc P ‘s point, above..
February 7th, 2010 at 9:59 pm
“It is not a search company, it is a surveillance and data mining company.”
Totally. And Reynolds Wrap is in the hat business.
February 7th, 2010 at 10:10 pm
Marc P is right. Google doesn’t sell a product. Google’s only real revenue stream is from advertising. Everything is done with an eye to how to increase those revenues, generally by allowing more targeted ads through tracking users. A good example is Android which requires a Gmail account to function. And then users are encouraged to sync their contacts through Google which can cross reference those. And of course, there’s the correlation with your web surfing from your laptop or desktop. And now to suit our great computer, you’re magnetic ink.
BTW, is the Saint’s crushing win bullish or bearish? While I was hopeful based on past upsets, I have to admit I didn’t really expect them to pull it off based on the past 4 games.
February 7th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
Mark: you’re over-blowing the risks of RF (radio frequency) exposure from cell phones. Your point about research being tainted (by corporate biases AND by academics and politicians seeking to gain funding by generating Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt, i.e. Al Bore and Global Warming) is well-taken. However, there are sources of non-ionizing radiation all around us everyday that are much higher than the exposure from cell phones. It should be common sense not to keep a transmitting device next to your brain for hours on end — but normal usage (and using a headset) should be fine. RF is nothing new….and neither are the lawyers looking for a new boogeyman on which to base liability lawsuits…. Beware pseudoscience on BOTH sides!
February 7th, 2010 at 11:56 pm
Hey, they virtually rule the world
February 8th, 2010 at 1:07 am
@Marc P – “it is a surveillance and data mining company”
Doesn’t that description apply to just about business in the 21st century that consumes and disseminates information, including the NY Times, Amazon, Reuters, etc ? How is that “evil” ?
@Mike -
Android works with GMail accounts, but it’s not exclusive – you can use Android with any email service/server you wish. And congrats on the Saints – very impressive !
February 8th, 2010 at 5:47 am
tawm,
sorry, if that wasn’t clear, though, these: “GOOG, though, should pay attention to the, current, ‘cell-network’ limitations–namely, Backhaul..
If I were them, I’d light more of their ‘Dark Fiber’ assets, and go with VOIP–telephony over internet–via Wi-Fi & Wi-Max..
that is, of course, until people take this: …” from above, are My words/thoughts..
and, the article is from: http://www.gq.com/cars-gear/gear-and-gadgets/201002/warning-cell-phone-radiation?currentPage=3
or, differently, Pursue opportunities w/ RF-based wireless comm. b/c its demand-curve is, still, growing, but, note current limitations of the existing network (namely, capacity/backhaul), and the potential for the Market’s perception of the Good, itself (namely, RF-based Wireless Comm), to change..
see: “Femtocells are low-cost, low-power wireless access points that operate in licensed spectrum to connect standard mobile devices to a mobile operator’s network using residential DSL or cable broadband connections.
Femtocells enable the mobile operator to extend coverage, increase capacity and provide new services in areas where access would otherwise be limited or unavailable, such as in buildings or rural areas. Femtocells improve service and coverage without the major costs involved in deploying fixed infrastructure (antennas, base stations, etc.), while also decreasing backhaul costs since mobile traffic is routed over the IP network.
Unlike WiFi-based solutions which require dual-mode handsets, Femtocells enable operators to offer Fixed Mobile Convergence (FMC) services based on subscribers’ regular 3G phones.
Percello’s cutting-edge Femtocell silicon products can be used to power residential, enterprise and outdoor Femtocell applications for UMTS/HSPA+ and LTE networks. Percello’s dedicated Femtocell SoC products enable cost-effective deployments, with maximum coverage and optimal carrier-grade performance…” to begin with..
http://www.percello.com/femtocell.php
http://clusty.com/search?input-form=clusty-simple&v%3Asources=webplus&query=femto-cell+low-power
LSS: there’s a difference between ‘cell-tower’-based ‘wireless comm.’ and other technologies (namely, Wi-Fi/Wi-Max) that can deliver the same ‘Good’ in a different fashion..
Whether it was from George H.W. Bush’s “Thousand points of Light..”, or the Internet, itself, We should know, whether the ‘problem’ is “Government”, “Electricity Generation/Distribution/Usage”, “Communications”, etc., the ‘solution’ of “distributed, multi-point network(s)” is, ususally, the right answer..
~~
this: “…there are sources of non-ionizing radiation all around us everyday that are much higher than the exposure from cell phones…” though, is, no doubt, True.
and, to your point, I was going to say (tongue-in-cheek style): “It’s too bad that “Fear/Uncertainty/Doubt” isn’t counted as part of our GDP (for, surely, if it was, that # would, still, be growing..)”– but, sadly, in actuality, it already is..
February 8th, 2010 at 8:08 am
hgordon: I know you can use other accounts, but you know human nature. Most people have no idea how to set up pop3 accounts and will just use the default along with syncing their contacts. After first trying gmail a few years ago and getting targeted ads concerning the subject of the messages I was sending and receiving (Honda Accords) it was pretty obvious that their is no privacy in any Google service.
For the tin foil crowd, here’s a new one: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/02/08/google_mystery_domain/
I thought it was interesting that some are finding their machines connecting to this new Google domain at startup without any application running – that they know of.
And a little-talked-about Google custom server is now running 13% of websites http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/29/google_web_server/ Hey – free is very attractive if you are willing to trade the privacy of all your users for it.
There have been many other similar reports, e.g. that Google toobar continues to report your browsing activity even after you turn it off. I’m sure Chrome reports back, no matter what settings you use.
My opinion on the China deal was that not being evil happened to coincide with business in that case. Whatever China says about wanting outside investment, it is notoriously favorable to Chinese companies and the idea is generally to steal the tech and then produce a local competing clone. Baidu was has been more or less kicking Google’s ass because of government favoritism. Here’s a major example: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/29/baidu_victory/ My guess is that the Chinese government pressures computer makers to include Baidu as the default search engine. The google exit was probably just an attempt to pressure the Chinese to give it equal treatment by withdrawing it’s free services from the Chinese market and hoping user pressure would do the trick. Whether that succeeds, it hasn’t really lost anything.
February 8th, 2010 at 10:57 am
I love Google.
Great Super Bowl Ad too.
People complaining about privacy? You forget that there are millions of *cough*idiots, excuse me, individuals who voluntarily share their whole lives on Facebook and the lot.
Just read a Philip K. Dick book to get an idea of the future of privacy….
It might be nasty at times, but ultimately, what is gained by this information resource I think(I hope) will out-weight the bad. And I think that is Google’s philosophy too.
Anyhow…wow, Google completely dominates South America and Europe! Minus India, Asia needs the most work.
February 8th, 2010 at 11:09 am
@mike – I think that’s a “feature” of all free email services, including Yahoo, Hotmail, and others. That’s been the Internet model for free services since the mid-90′s. For that matter, look at how Amazon and other online retailers make buying recommendations based on your personal history.
What you are describing is a fundamental to the business of cloud computing – by tapping in, you have implicitly agreed to share information. I suppose by some measure there is a sinister aspect to this model, especially if there is a lack of disclosure about how information is collected and used, potentially leading to “Enemy of the State” scenarios. I’m not in the tin foil camp, but I understand the perspective.
February 8th, 2010 at 10:20 pm
Giving away “free” services in exchange for information is the foundation of the web 2.0 business model. Obviously people are willing to pay the price of their privacy. I even see ads for a free online tax return prep service. Do I need to check them out to guess that they sell the tax return data? TurboTax sells user data and their users PAY TurboTax. It’s a great business model. Tivo gets people to pay a monthly fee to be tracked. Gotta love it.
I have no criticisms of the “don’t worry, be happy” crowd so long as they knowingly sell their data and understand the implications of its use. It’s simply good journalism to tell the whole story so readers know and can make a choice.
February 11th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
It may be time to start thinking of a company like Google in terms of a utility company instead of a retail firm.
I use the telephone every day, but I don’t think of AT&T “ruling my world.” Similarly, I use something made or hosted by Google every day, but I don’t consider myself a captive to the Google universe or even a manic advocate, the way some Apple fans are. To me, Google is fast becoming like hot water or electricity – I just assume it’s there without much thought to loyality or affection.