Why does Google still have the “I’m Feeling Lucky” button?
reallifemag.com
reallifemag.com
- I'm Feeling Doodley: Google search for "google doodles"
- I'm Feeling Puzzled: redirect to http://www.agoogleaday.com/#date=2012-02-29
- I'm Feeling Trendy: redirect to https://trends.google.com/trends/trendingsearches/daily?geo=...
- I'm Feeling Artistic: redirect to https://artsandculture.google.com/asset/xwE7rgYgnWm68w
- I'm Feeling Adventurous: Google search for "roll a die" (with die rolling widget embedded above search results)
- I'm Feeling Playful: Google search for "tic tac toe" (with tic tac toe game embedded above search results)
- I'm Feeling Generous: redirect to https://play.google.com/store/apps/editorial_collection/prom...
The only one I've encountered that does't send people a Google site or widget is "I'm Feeling Stellar", which is just an image search for "reflection nebula".
For "Real Life", there is a youtube video immediately at the top of the results, above ads and featured snippets. This youtube video is what is shown by clicking, "I'm Feeling Lucky." Despite this, the first result was only shown on my desktop when I hit pagedown twice and looked at the very bottom of the page.
However, the result that is returned by "I'm Feeling Lucky" for "Is there a god" is actually the first result and not any of the special content at the top. But in this case, there is no youtube video in the listings.
(Using a plain ! anywhere in your query seems to do the same thing as \)
Agreed. They're an awesome feature, too. I just like sharing this little trick every now and then as it's not really mentioned anywhere (I accidentally discovered it), unlike bangs which DuckDuckGo very strongly advertise.
Edit: Yes! https://duckduckgo.com/newbang
https://old.reddit.com/r/duckduckgo/comments/sp9e5r/backslas...
And, the credibility was gone.
Serious question, if the article had only made the first two casual accusations, but omitted the third,would you have still thought it lacked credibility?
Side note, accusing someone of white supremacy is subtly different from, and to my ears less strident than outright calling them a white supremacist. If I am a jaywalker, it could mean that I've committed one, a few, or many acts of jaywalking, even without my knowledge. It's a mere statement of fact. But if I were a "jaywalkist," if such a term existed, it would more likely mean that I have a personal philosophy that Jaywalking Is Good, or at least, that I was a blatant and habitual practitioner of transgressive traversals. It says something about my essential character in the eyes of my accuser.
These numbers don't add up....
PM: About 0.2% of searches
Exec: So basically 1%
Edit: 3.66 billion in 2007, so yeah, doesn’t add up.
Aha! I'd have never noticed this Easter egg if I didn't see the article.
I was a Googler many, many moons ago and IIRC this actually came up in orientation.
So lucky.
Google is a company that has built things which have changed the world (whether this tends to the good / bad / neutral will take a much longer time to sus out - and it'll certainly vary on the perspective of the person looking back). Any undertaking that results in the impact the size that Google has would find itself in a very similar space.
(I am an xoogler fwiw)
The only truthful answer is "all of the above".
But, I suspect Google's fate is the same as IBM.
It fades into obsolesce within a generation. It's already happening. The tell-tale sign is that its search product is becoming absolutely useless as every search category follows the same pattern as the recipe problem (have you googled error messages recently? If even stack trace search results are dominated by useless ad spam, you're done...). It used to be that search was the sacred cow of Google. You could inject a few very obvious and low-screen-real-estate ads into search, but that was it. All sorts of shady shit happened in every other product category, the company shut down services left and right, etc. etc. But search -- search was sacred. Take a reasonable profit, and no more. That mentality is apparently gone.
Our children will think of Google like we think of IBM. They'll remember a company that invented the search engine, as well as the "just save everything and then search for stuff" mode of work. The core innovation was an enormously useful and a powerful augmentation to human intelligence, but in the end the innovation factory was burned to the ground by smart people yielding spreadsheets.
Youtube, aquisition. Android, aquisition. Workspaces, aquisition. DoubleClick, aquisition. Waze, aquisition.
Feels like it has been roughly a decade since Google changed the world.
I'm not sure the history with workspaces, but Google Docs etc. were very important. Google also gets points in my book just by scaling YouTube, Maps, Gmail etc. To the degree they've published their work it's been revolutionary to the field.
Excellent engineering with terrible/conservative corporate strategy, imo.
Most acquisitions are kind of gigantic re-orgs: they cost a ton and rarely leave things better than when they started - oh and generally execs will always feel they were successful :)
Most of the examples you listed are the dream acquisition with exponential improvement. I have a hard time seeing Android on 2 billion devices or YouTube with millions of creators delivering HD content across the world without standing hand-in-hand with the rest of the teams at Google. Similarly Google would not be able to do it either (Google video would have been sunset without YouTube acquisition and no one was building a consumer electronics focused os).
Google certainly has screwed the pooch on many acquisitions but to chalk up all those other successes as a given or as pure luck is a naive statement. There was a ton of hard work, huge chance of failure and really impactful results.
Indeed.
Cloud Infrastructure = playing catch up to a player that set the stage (and still leads), Go I don't think "changes the world" quite as much as consolidates and improves things that already were available in everything from C to Python, but suited to a specific set of use cases that Google particularly cared about for their own business first and the "world" later. K8s came out in roughly the same window as other orchestration tech (e.g. Mesos) but had/s the benefit of the 'Google' name attached to it. It simplifies some things certainly, but is it really a "world changer"?
TBH, more seems to be about changing Googles world more than the broader one, but that goes to your original quote.
Borg's real win was the insane colocation and oversubscription it enabled, both of which K8s and all major public clouds have failed to replicate because you can't securely share bare metal between customers.
and K8s ended up being too little too late, despite beating Mesos and being quite successful, because VMs had won by that point.
I wouldn't miss I'm Feeling Lucky if they bin it. What I do miss is the option to show "forum results only". Google removed the option a few years ago. They don't want people going to forums, presumably they can't follow and scrutinize your activity. How dare you login to a service untrackable by the company that changed the world!
There are a lot of companies that have built things which have changed the world. Some of them in worse.
This conveniently implies that nothing should or can be done about Google’s known, current abuses. After all, in the grand arc of time, who’s to say they won’t have had a positive impact by someone’s reckoning?
Now if you're saying "negative effects", then comparing to longrun impacts is fine. But "abuses" is a much stronger claim, and enforcement needn't have anything to do with estimates of longterm benefit.
But it used to work as advertised and you might actually get lucky if you tried.
Help fix the search results maybe..
There's a clear opportunity right now for an awesome search engine to usurp Google's throne. Bing and Microsoft are too conservative to be a serious threat, but would happily acquire an engine better then Google. Nobody wants to be David on purpose when Goliath is a terrifyingly huge and scary as Google, but I think it's gonna happen soon.
It’s almost similar to how GANs work. Google tries to filter crap from content and the SEO spammers try to generate crap that is indistinguishable from content. And we settled at a point where seo spammers have won and their content looks like real valuable content but without real substance that ML can’t identify yet.
https://www.searchenginejournal.com/google-eat/quality-rater...
The analogue here is Microsoft losing its software dominance not due to a desktop competitor overthrowing them, but through failing to play the Web and mobile games as effectively as the new dominant players.
Bing has the best results for porn
Google still wins for coding stuff though. Other than that it’s a cesspit of irrelevant keyword ads and SEO spam
So at the moment, for search engine supremacy, you have MS & Google going head to head using different methods to track people online.
I'm surprised Apple doesnt do their own search engine for their products, its really not that hard to do imo!