853 karma · joined November 23, 2015
Back in around circa 2006, Microsoft one day suddenly decided to remove Google search and replace it with Bing on their default browser, IE (which was still number one back then). This threatened Google's revenues to a considerable extent as online search is one of the major source of their income.
At that time, it was Sundar Pichai who was in the forefront of managing some quick OEM contracts with Dell, HP, etc., so that Google toolbar was installed by default on all their computers. Google toolbar ensured that users were shown a confirmation dialog and were given the option to make Google search the default again! This later ensured Sundar's rise in power and respect that ultimately made him CEO one day.
One can of course argue that Google is such a superior engine compared to Bing that the users would have visited google.com anyway (which will also result in that option to make it default). However, its also true that most users will not take the pain of changing their setup if it already works! So who knows, if Sundar's intervention hadn't happened at that time, maybe Bing and Google would be on an equal footing today!
EDIT
Source: Straight from the horse's mouth (Jeff Nelson, Chromebook inventor and former Google employee): https://www.quora.com/What-did-Sundar-Pichai-do-that-his-pee...
Not a network engineer, but this isn't a rocket science, right? Linux tools like traceroute, etc. can do this since ages?
Because its all about making compromises to manage an app and achieve its goals. You are right about the time to market and launching the product sooner should be the number one priority. But of all the factors that make your product worthwhile, performance is a pretty darn good factor.
There are several websites today on the internet who have the potential to become great, if only they pay some heed to the performance factor. Take the Upwork freelancing site for example, its performance was really solid when it was oDesk, its predecessor. Its basically, because of the earlier oDesk goodwill that it still even has a sizable userbase today. Sometime in 2013, along the lines of your thinking, some management guru must have cut corners in development of the repolished upwork site, and the result was an absolute performance nightmare! As a freelancer, Upwork is a third or fourth priority for me now, whereas the former oDesk was actually number one.
Another example of a nightmarish performance is Quora - it has a fantastic readership that supplies solid content to the site. Its a solid proof that really good content is so much valued in the online world - that despite its lagging performance, people are willing to endure a site with good content, but that doesn't mean its ideal. Quora still has a lot of potential, it can match or maybe even surpass the levels of Reddit and HN, or even Facebook and Linkedin if they pay heed to the performance factor, but I don't see that happening soon!
That might be possible, but its too early to say anything at this point in time. The thing is that Bitcoin has technologically established itself as a stable crypto-currency and also an open-source wallet software. In future, some governments may also come up with their own centralized digital currency, but it will be too little and too late compared to something like bitcoin or litecoin.
Besides, bitcoin is international and a lot of people have started transacting in it already. Now, the government has to tread carefully about this, despite all the talk of sovereign nation and government upholding its economic control, no government can go against its own people in this day and age.
Also, actually persecuting the public for using crypto-currencies is against their own interest as it will create something like a Streisand effect. Right now, only the technically inclined know about bitcoins, blockchains and wallets, the rest treat it like some magical buzzwords. But if they start persecuting, a lot of other non-technical folks will also come to know about it and they will also start using it.
In short, the future depends on the mood of the people of the nation and not the governments. Its a fallacy that money begets is value as a legal tender by the government. Rather, it gets is value because its "generally acceptable", in other words the people accept it. People of a nation are above the government, not the other way round.
Yet, some countries have started willingly renouncing that monopoly.
For example, Australian Reserve Bank has clearly stated that "There would be nothing to stop people in this country deciding to transact in some other currency in a shop if they wanted to. There’s no law against that, so we do have competing currencies."[1]
Similarly, The South African Reserve Bank has come to the conclusion that "The Bank does not oversee, supervise or regulate the Virtual Currency (VC) landscape."[2]
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legality_of_bitcoin_by_country...
Does this have anything to do with Trump coming into power?
I am an absolute noob in science, but still want to ask out of curiosity. If a biological virus can have a cell to cell infection vector, can't an anti-body or immunogen also have a cell-to-cell "replenishing" factor?
But why don't they use the proven common-sense strategy of not storing the passwords at all, but store the hashes instead? They can validate by converting user-input to a hash and then there is no harm even if the user auth table is stolen.
I can also understand if the results are removed just from the USA based (google.com) site, but they are also removed from google.co.uk, google.co.in, etc. Since US Govt. has no jurisdiction over these other countries, I think its improper to apply DMCA blacklisting over there.
And yet, we have bots, spyware, malware, etc. infecting the IoT devices already, think what will happen if a more "Evolved AI" attacks these devices (or even worse, us!)?