3 ms·

Great to see Google splintering off into single duty compartments instead of spreading itself so thin that nothing gets done with the same amount of focus. Alph

Great to see Google splintering off into single duty compartments instead of spreading itself so thin that nothing gets done with the same amount of focus. Alphabet was a true design decision, and a mature one at that. One thing that crossed my mind recently was the notion of Google and its long relationship with hardware: we have this thing called the Blockchain now, and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google. Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish. Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps?

dpark 10y ago
> One thing that crossed my mind recently was the notion of Google and its long relationship with hardware: we have this thing called the Blockchain now, and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. I was under the impression that most mining is now done by a few groups using special purpose hardware. Mining using hardware bought with "pocket money" seems like a losing game at this point. > It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. It makes me sad that so much energy is wasted computing hashes for mining when it seems to add so little to society. In comparison, I think hosting holiday photos is a more valuable task. > I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. I'm not sure why Google would give their hardware to a random group of miners. I'm not sure why the miners would want it either since x86 is not an efficient way to mine. Out of date x86 hardware especially.
TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago
> we have this thing called the Blockchain now, A “blockchain” is a type of distributed data structure, there's not just The Blockchain, unless you're specifically talking about Bitcoin, in which case I don't know why you wouldn't refer to it specifically. > and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. You're either suggesting that Google run Bitcoin nodes in their datacentres (which defeats Bitcoin's decentralisation), or that Google should make hardware specifically for Bitcoin. Given Google is all about centralised, non-anonymised data they can mine for ad targeting, what exactly would appeal to them about Bitcoin? > It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. Sure, there might be better uses for some of Google's servers, arguably, but why would “changing the direction of finance” require that? Aren't proposals like Bitcoin usually based on decentralisation? > I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. Why would Google give away free servers to Bitcoin enthusiasts? What possible business incentive could there be? If they're just being nice, then why to Bitcoiners, of all people? Bitcoin (and systems using the same proof-of-work chain design) is an extremely wasteful user of energy and would not put such systems to good use. > I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google. Much more likely that Google would simply close its online services on you without a token of gratitude to its users. > Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish. You're forgetting the astronomical energy requirements for Bitcoin mining. > Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps? Post-Snowden, pro-privacy services are essentially the antithesis of Google's business model. If Google can't read your chats, they can't scan them for keywords.

dpark 10y ago

> One thing that crossed my mind recently was the notion of Google and its long relationship with hardware: we have this thing called the Blockchain now, and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. I was under the impression that most mining is now done by a few groups using special purpose hardware. Mining using hardware bought with "pocket money" seems like a losing game at this point. > It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. It makes me sad that so much energy is wasted computing hashes for mining when it seems to add so little to society. In comparison, I think hosting holiday photos is a more valuable task. > I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. I'm not sure why Google would give their hardware to a random group of miners. I'm not sure why the miners would want it either since x86 is not an efficient way to mine. Out of date x86 hardware especially.

TazeTSchnitzel 10y ago

> we have this thing called the Blockchain now, A “blockchain” is a type of distributed data structure, there's not just The Blockchain, unless you're specifically talking about Bitcoin, in which case I don't know why you wouldn't refer to it specifically. > and it could do with some of Google's hardware to run on, instead of independent factions of people spending their pocket money on their own hardware. You're either suggesting that Google run Bitcoin nodes in their datacentres (which defeats Bitcoin's decentralisation), or that Google should make hardware specifically for Bitcoin. Given Google is all about centralised, non-anonymised data they can mine for ad targeting, what exactly would appeal to them about Bitcoin? > It kind of makes me jealous and annoyed that so much could be spent for what effectively is sometimes just a data center for storing people's holiday snaps on Google Plus, when it could be used to host micro democracies and change the direction of finance. Sure, there might be better uses for some of Google's servers, arguably, but why would “changing the direction of finance” require that? Aren't proposals like Bitcoin usually based on decentralisation? > I suspect all that hardware will eventually be re-purposed many times throughout the course of the Google experiment and probably will eventually be given away at some point to the blockchainers who need it. Why would Google give away free servers to Bitcoin enthusiasts? What possible business incentive could there be? If they're just being nice, then why to Bitcoiners, of all people? Bitcoin (and systems using the same proof-of-work chain design) is an extremely wasteful user of energy and would not put such systems to good use. > I can picture the scene: dreadlocked decentralists rejoicing at their new hardware gift from Google, 25+ years from now. The ultimate redemption from their years of slavishly handing their personal information over to Google in exchange for a decent search experience. A true revenge for consumers of Google. Much more likely that Google would simply close its online services on you without a token of gratitude to its users. > Meanwhile Google would have entirely switched to SSDs and are probably using post-quantum chips, but at least we can host multiple different blockchains now without spending our pocket money on them. The blockchainers can start to get rich and blockchain can really flourish. You're forgetting the astronomical energy requirements for Bitcoin mining. > Also, Google needs to create services which are for a post Snowden world. Allo is cute, but entirely inferior to things like Signal which addresses the problem of encrypted private chat head on. Google needs to create things like its own VPN service, perhaps? Post-Snowden, pro-privacy services are essentially the antithesis of Google's business model. If Google can't read your chats, they can't scan them for keywords.