5 ms·

I'm picturing it killing a lot of innovation at Google. Many projects, such as the self-driving car or search for that matter have no initial profitable means f

I'm picturing it killing a lot of innovation at Google. Many projects, such as the self-driving car or search for that matter have no initial profitable means for years if ever. With that, I feel it will also stop the evolution of many products, e.g. Why risk investing in a long term project, when they know we can make money this quarter doing X. On the other hand this will likely lead to more stable products,and products will disappear less often.

wrsh07 11y ago
Just FYI, search is ridiculously profitable [see "search ads"]
- lettergram 11y ago
  I agree search is ridiculously profitable, but if you showed up to a meeting in 1998 and said: "Search is going to be a multi-billion dollar industry" the business exec would laugh you out of the office.
  - nine_k 11y ago
    In 1998 there was a enough online commerce (in fact, there was a crazy boom of it, the original internet boom) for a good exec to see the potential of the ad market for it. Searching is precisely the moment when an ad can be well-targeted.
    - erikpukinskis 11y ago
      I was alive back then. It was not common belief that search would be a huge money maker. No one thought Google would be bigger than Microsoft until they started doing the ad auctions and people could start to see how the money could actually flow. That Google won the Internet money pot was a bit of a surprise to most.
      - mc32 11y ago
        I think that started with overture. At least I recall overture's business prop being paid search results.
      - nine_k 11y ago
        I was also a user of google.stanford.edu back then. Nobody then thought that Apple would be bigger than MS either.
  - jacques_chester 11y ago
    That's because they'd be right to laugh. Search isn't a multi-billion dollar industry. Advertising is. If you don't believe me, name a company making billions of dollars from search engine fees alone.
    - jacquesm 11y ago
      Would palantir qualify?
      - jacques_chester 11y ago
        You know what? Maybe they do, in the larger sense of "search engine". But if we make the definition too generic then folk will start naming Bloomberg and LexisNexis and you and I, being two guys called Jacques who remember the late 90s, will wonder how these companies wound up in the same category as Alta Vista, Lycos or Excite.
      - bane 11y ago
        Probably not: Nobody knows their current revenue/profit figures, but most public estimates seem to indicate under a billion/year. Their primary sales appear to be consulting and integration services with their software as a minor concern.
- fludlight 11y ago
  "search ads" == "lead generation" This is the difference between FB and GOOG: one sells an audience that, demographically, is likely to want your product (similar to how TV ads are sold), the other, one that wants to buy it, likely right f*ing now.
  - dhimes 11y ago
    I'm not sure which is which in your example- I'm guessing that you mean the person searching GOOG is more likely to buy, but nevertheless I think the only one that applies to entirely is Amazon. The percent of searches in which I am trying to buy something is quite small on Google. Even if I am in the market, I am doing background research on the web. When I'm ready to buy I most often go to Amazon (even if I don't buy from them I still check). On Amazon, when I search I have my wallet out.
mtgx 11y ago
I think it will slow down innovation and Google, and I also think it will make the surviving products better in the long term, with lower chances of being killed. Right now it seems Google employees want to jump to exciting new products all the time, and nobody is left to maintain the older ones. This would happen a lot less often if those "exciting new products" had a high chance of getting bankrupt and then for them to lose those jobs.
ignoramous 11y ago
> I'm picturing it killing a lot of innovation at Google. I don't think so. Amazon has been run a lot like that. It hasn't been doing badly on the innovation front.
JVIDEL 11y ago
In all honesty ARA was far closer to consumer-ready and thus profitability, but the whole modular phone project seems dead now
- marssaxman 11y ago
  How do you figure? Having done some product development work, it seemed to me like a highly speculative project, unlikely ever to ship as a consumer device.
visarga 11y ago
I am saddened by Google's decision to cut off Boston Dynamics because it sends a negative message about the progress of robotics in the near term. I was hoping they would apply reinforcement learning algorithms from DeepMind to solve robot locomotion and various other robotic tasks. On the other hand I am happy to see Amazon's Echo being successful and take that as a sign that at least voice/dialogue systems are going to improve by a lot in the near future, or at least that there are tons of funds to be invested in research.

wrsh07 11y ago

Just FYI, search is ridiculously profitable [see "search ads"]

lettergram 11y ago
I agree search is ridiculously profitable, but if you showed up to a meeting in 1998 and said: "Search is going to be a multi-billion dollar industry" the business exec would laugh you out of the office.
- nine_k 11y ago
  In 1998 there was a enough online commerce (in fact, there was a crazy boom of it, the original internet boom) for a good exec to see the potential of the ad market for it. Searching is precisely the moment when an ad can be well-targeted.
  - erikpukinskis 11y ago
    I was alive back then. It was not common belief that search would be a huge money maker. No one thought Google would be bigger than Microsoft until they started doing the ad auctions and people could start to see how the money could actually flow. That Google won the Internet money pot was a bit of a surprise to most.
    - mc32 11y ago
      I think that started with overture. At least I recall overture's business prop being paid search results.
    - nine_k 11y ago
      I was also a user of google.stanford.edu back then. Nobody then thought that Apple would be bigger than MS either.
- jacques_chester 11y ago
  That's because they'd be right to laugh. Search isn't a multi-billion dollar industry. Advertising is. If you don't believe me, name a company making billions of dollars from search engine fees alone.
  - jacquesm 11y ago
    Would palantir qualify?
    - jacques_chester 11y ago
      You know what? Maybe they do, in the larger sense of "search engine". But if we make the definition too generic then folk will start naming Bloomberg and LexisNexis and you and I, being two guys called Jacques who remember the late 90s, will wonder how these companies wound up in the same category as Alta Vista, Lycos or Excite.
    - bane 11y ago
      Probably not: Nobody knows their current revenue/profit figures, but most public estimates seem to indicate under a billion/year. Their primary sales appear to be consulting and integration services with their software as a minor concern.
fludlight 11y ago
"search ads" == "lead generation" This is the difference between FB and GOOG: one sells an audience that, demographically, is likely to want your product (similar to how TV ads are sold), the other, one that wants to buy it, likely right f*ing now.
- dhimes 11y ago
  I'm not sure which is which in your example- I'm guessing that you mean the person searching GOOG is more likely to buy, but nevertheless I think the only one that applies to entirely is Amazon. The percent of searches in which I am trying to buy something is quite small on Google. Even if I am in the market, I am doing background research on the web. When I'm ready to buy I most often go to Amazon (even if I don't buy from them I still check). On Amazon, when I search I have my wallet out.

mtgx 11y ago

I think it will slow down innovation and Google, and I also think it will make the surviving products better in the long term, with lower chances of being killed. Right now it seems Google employees want to jump to exciting new products all the time, and nobody is left to maintain the older ones. This would happen a lot less often if those "exciting new products" had a high chance of getting bankrupt and then for them to lose those jobs.

ignoramous 11y ago

> I'm picturing it killing a lot of innovation at Google. I don't think so. Amazon has been run a lot like that. It hasn't been doing badly on the innovation front.

JVIDEL 11y ago

In all honesty ARA was far closer to consumer-ready and thus profitability, but the whole modular phone project seems dead now

marssaxman 11y ago
How do you figure? Having done some product development work, it seemed to me like a highly speculative project, unlikely ever to ship as a consumer device.

visarga 11y ago

I am saddened by Google's decision to cut off Boston Dynamics because it sends a negative message about the progress of robotics in the near term. I was hoping they would apply reinforcement learning algorithms from DeepMind to solve robot locomotion and various other robotic tasks. On the other hand I am happy to see Amazon's Echo being successful and take that as a sign that at least voice/dialogue systems are going to improve by a lot in the near future, or at least that there are tons of funds to be invested in research.