getting pretty close to the 'No politics' rule here folks.
Please be careful as I dont want to close this thread.
getting pretty close to the 'No politics' rule here folks.
Please be careful as I dont want to close this thread.
jalbertbowdenii, nice link. But I couldn't tell if it also used server stats? To catch all those without JS.
- i'm not sure exactly what you mean by that exactly, sorry not trying to join the arguments going on here, just lost in translation.
piwik comes with PHP/MySQL backend and you install it on your server. i'm assuming it does? but seeing as how assumptions go, if not, i'll say confidently that you can add your own.
hope that helps?
i didn't understand "But I couldn't tell if it also used server stats? To catch all those without JS." @Stomme poes
yeah, only a few can go against google.
I remember once, I told my kids that if they cleaned their room, they each got a dollar. When they were "done", and I inspected their rooms, I found all they'd done was shove things under their bed and fussed about it when I refused to pay. Their reason for still wanting to be paid?
"You didn't tell us how to clean it!"
The point is this: the proposal, as it sits now, can be interpreted various ways, and more often than not, that interpretation will be representative of the interpreters expectations.
This proposal, as it sits, has the potential, to go one way or the other. The only thing people are doing by criticising it, is forcing it become more well defined so that we can better determine exactly what it means.
Right now, Google and Verizon want to "clean rooms", but the details are a bit vague. Once the details get ironed out, then, and only then, will I really be able to tell how "good" the plan is.
For it's own safety Google better not make that deal... as tight as it's security and such would be. There will always be some rough black-hatted hacker with the ability to hack into Google and mess things up for them big time in retaliation if the deal goes through.
What a Chaotic Situation, Is nothing safe from the big Corp.'s and their overfilled wallets, If they have the money to buy out google's internet searching capabilities then they should give their employee's a raise and leave the one thing on the internet that is sacred and holy ALONE!
Just trading one server-side language for another?? : ) I agree, ss JS seems pretty cool, and powerful.Quote:
Originally Posted by jalbertbowdenii
By server stats, I meant:
One nice thing about having both server stats and JS stats is if you have a bunch of old mobile users without JS, you know it and can decide what, if anything, to do or change with your site. My boss' Erickson doesn't have JS, meaning he can't even log into our stats, lawlz (for some stupid reason they require JS just to log in, never mind that's the server's job and not the client's).
Serenarules, excellent post.
I agree with you that Google sometimes neglect the importance of small business and buries it. But to be clear, there is not alternative to Google services anyway. My website is starting to gain popularity very slowly as it is not yet sorted by Google. It is sorted in the 3rd place in yahoo, Bing and Alta vista. So we should try to manage our business making it a bit suitable to Google. good luck!
I kinda disagree. I think putting too much effort into a single search engine will render you like a Giant Panda: they only eat 6 species of bamboo or something. Very limited. This means you'll need to do a lot of work if/when the next big thing in search comes along. This doesn't mean "don't use Google" but I wouldn't throw everything onto that boat.Quote:
So we should try to manage our business making it a bit suitable to Google.
will definetly need to search on google and look for alternative since nobody on this thread is able to provide alternative.
Google is realizing the ultimate complication in a free market. So they're going for a way to create "digital human rights" essentially by making a marketing agreement between ISPs. This allows special, highlighted sites or services to have premium type of speed while standard speed stays with everyone else. While that can seem harsh and bad, and while I don't side with Google's "giving up for a compromise instead", I wouldn't see them as evil, just running out of options at this time and made an easy compromise instead.
Really, if this does happen, it depends on the terms. That is, as long as 3-8mbps is the standard speed, then the web is still fast for the open public and it'll depend on the developer's end to work with the speed they have.
I dislike people defending the notion of premium content, stating things like TV. I don't even support them doing that! They should just raise the price on their services to compensate for profit margins.
In the long run, I'm sure if they do such a thing as kill net neutrality, publicity and protesting from their customers as well as a national uproar will most likely occur, thus they either continue this exclusive bulls**t and lose more money than they hoped to gain (creating a loss purely) or they keep their guns on internet speeds they offer as plans and thus continue net neutrality.
It's always pissed me off with how they do the exclusive stuff. Really, it's the networks and shows that attack people to TV, not the provider (they only attract the lowest price with the most shows available). Without the golden content that the providers pay nothing for (only bandwidth bills of their customers), then their service will not last.
I just hope someone makes some speech or so to show how much net neutrality has given us, as every site online gained their popularity from it, as well as technology innovation (most of these sites run off of open source technologies after all). That because of this, the web became a profitable medium and technical revolution that inspires even the latest technology developments. Many jobs and huge potential has been granted because of this, and ending net neutrality is a threat to society, not just some profit gain of the provider. But most of the people are old in Washington and such, and do not understand this about the internet, other than email and Facebook.
Their services and products are still top-notch regardless, so you should probably stop looking at the situation as immoral given the intent of the company and use tools that better your project/company; as that should be your actual priority.
The current network would continue to exist, which is good. But it looks like under the deal that you could develop a site with new generation technologies or upgrades all stuff, so that when your visitors browses you get all latest facilities, Google is the best ever tool to search any information regarding any thing it would be there.
Nah. Do non-nerds even know what net neutrality is? Are regular Internet customers actually following any of this?Quote:
In the long run, I'm sure if they do such a thing as kill net neutrality, publicity and protesting from their customers as well as a national uproar will most likely occur
I really would be slack-jawed surprised if there was actual publicity and protesting over the topic. National uproar? Remember those globilisation talks, where in a few cities there were some students protesting with puppet shows? Yeah, kinda lackluster. The big companies could very well be safe from major customer dissatisfaction if they make the idea of net neutrality totally dead. Nerds are aware of the issue and care. My uncle? He's running Windows 98, has cable+internet, complains to us about how he has to buy a hundred stupid sports channels just to get his car racing channel, and otherwise doesn't give it a second thought. Isn't he in the majority? (well, not with the Win98 thing)
Now this one is definitely an interesting development. What would be a good alternative to Google. None actually, they have pretty much a good hold in the market. As for them dishing out the “Don't be evil” mantra, aren't we the ones who threw it out first in order to make the most?
Call me paranoid, but I prefer not to use Google Analytics. I realize they are probably getting all of that data anyway, but why open the door and invite them in?
I heard something like this a while back. Personally I did not think anything of it at the time. I also believe in net neutrality.
YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t89Ww...eature=channel
So I can't say it's the first I have heard of it. Maybe there might be a hint of truth. But they never mentioned Google, more of ISPs getting in on big business by having a subscription based internet service provider were certain ports will be blocked, unless you pay extra for more areas. I mentioned this to my brother and he said he will march the streets and ask everybody to unite in protest, and I can see millions doing the same.
We can all agree that the internet is probably the best thing that has happened to the world in the last 50 years, both for information sharing and social interactions.
Maybe I have thrown a spanner in the works with the video, but I thought it would be good to share it. Maybe the video has relavense, these people have been going on like this for a while. Alex Jones also touched on this, but most of which is says can be seen as exaggeration - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-9sYNkyoBY. It's hard to define whether it's scare mongering or has truth to it.
Take a look at this too - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2XPi...eature=related. The trouble is there are so many conspiracy theories on 2012, and it's hard to know if it's one of those. Apparently a red planet is suppose to hit us as well on that date too, ohh, don't forget the next stage of human evolution.
Not sure if anybody else has seen this. I saw it about a year back, but like I said I did not take much notice of it at the time.
Newviewit, the reason why I think your comments were biased an unjustified is mainly due to the fact you proclaim that Google is no longer useful because it does (big gasp) like all other commercial businesses and promotes it's own products and tries to forge an income from their free services. Google is not a charity, they are a business, they need to earn money and and I don't think anyone (including you) has the right to tell them they shouldn't be allowed to make a profit, unless you want to live in a communist society. As for biases towards large corporations, that's not true at all, paid results are simply the result of paying for the particular keywords - that doesn't mean that a large business is behind them. If you're a business (even a small one) and you're not willing to pay for advertising (which happened before the Internet - or have you not seen a Yellow Pages or Magazines or Newspapers?) then it's your (and their) own fault for not accounting for the cost of marketing.
Next there's your false and actually quite defamatory claims against GMail and Google Voice proclaiming that Google are manoeuvring themselves to sell peoples personal information to the highest bidder - which unless you have evidence to support is potentially grounds for a lawsuit. Proclaiming their evil for having information stored on their servers or for serving ads (without humans reading the content) is absurd, it's like saying that your web host is evil for having personal information stored in a server. Next there's your paranoid comments stating that by having documents stored on Google Doc's they will steal your business secrets - do you have proof that their doing it? Placing any information online makes it visible, even backing up your Word documents to your site would leave a potential for others to read it - Google are not an exception. Claiming that Google are digging their own grave for trying to make a profit (as a business) and making the slanderous allegations you have made (without proof) is nothing but opinionated gutter-talk which make you appear petty, uninformed and irrational... that's why I stated what I did. :)
1 - I'm saying everyday Google seems to sell out more and more by pimping it's own products and other large corporations in the search results = no longer as useful as in the past. Every day I see Google turning more and more into a portal type sight instead of an actual unbiased search engine. Yes there is no problem with Google making a profit but in doing so and getting away from the search game they are opening a gigantic space for competitors to take over market share.
2 - False and defamatory = my opinion and free speech! Any chance you work for Google? Why would free speech be ground for a lawsuit? ... you make me laugh! Amazing what the world has turned into. I'm saying Google may do this in the future = yes they might, it is an option. There is no way you can say for 100% that they will not. If you don't believe me then have a look at what happened to privacy at Facebook, or one of Google many lawsuits about spying on customers wifi, buzz, etc.
Google will not be able to keep up with investors profit expectations on Adwords only... so they will have to develop new revenue streams. One of the options is to sell customer data to the highest bidder and further integrate their in depth knowledge of people to deliver more targeted ads... it's just that Google is doing it gradually. Google changes their privacy statement when they feel like it...nothing is written in stone. I have the right to an opinion and my opinion is that Google is turning more evil every day and becoming less useful for me.
Google seems to have a successful formula in making money and naturally they have branched out to different areas, which they have also become successful in. With great power comes great responsibility, and we all know power corrupts. So it's only natural you feel this way.
I think we have to look at Microsoft. Years ago everybody was cursing them and saying how evil they were, and how Apple was the unadulterated version of an Operating System. Now that Apple has become popular people are turning to Linux. The truth be told Bill Gates now dedicates his time to charitable events and humanitarian gathering around the world, so maybe he does not sound so evil now.
I believe Google has a lot of power, but it knows that it's power was obtain not through deception, marketing and lies, but their open and ready they were for change. I would not be surprised if Google eventually released their own I.S.P. But I don't feel they will go against net neutrality, more of a consumer monopoly brought on by it's popularity rather than them.
I remember a while back there was a picture of Obama's wife in a monkey-like form. Google did not remove it until it had government pressure. So maybe it's the governments influence on Google which should be worried about.
Isn't that just what rich people do when they've bought everything they want and are bored with their money? I don't fault them for it, but I don't actually think most of them even do it for the publicity.Quote:
The truth be told Bill Gates now dedicates his time to charitable events and humanitarian gathering around the world, so maybe he does not sound so evil now.
Bill Gates dedicates most of his time to charity. Warren Buffet gave him a large sum of money, but Warren said he is not good with setting up charities, and he felt Melinda and Bill were far better candidates. I think it's just a case of going something good, as they are financially independent and don't really have to work.
Well and I'm supportive of something that helps 3rd world people get drugs and vaccines the rest of us take for granted (or refuse).
Look, I found somebody else who think this is true - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kozcyGfl2uo.